RT/DT Auction breaking own rules?

[Kenny]

These names are listed
http://www.domaintools.com/live-auction/browse-domains.html
but dont qualify according to their rules.

The rules state 3yrs old or older.

05
HawaiianBarbecues.com
ScienceMuseum.com
MyShopping.com
PhoneBoards.com
FairyGodfather.com
SexualOrgasm.com
BedroomFurnitureStore.com
BibleDude.com
InvestmentsAdviser.com
Synchronizations.com
SecureProxies.com
BankAmericas.com
HorseMedication.com
ForexCalculator.com
GroupDining.com
UnderBlanket.com
BannedFilm.com
Poker.in

06
HomesPros.com
GameLicenses.com
GourmetSalad.com
BloodRelatives.com
ForeignCurrencies.eu
DomainInternetRegistration.com
Dine.mobi
CouchLand.com
VancouverAirlines.com
CommercialPainter.com

07
StockTradingAccount.com
SkiTrainers.com
Introductions.eu
Customers.eu
Null.eu

Cy

 

[cache]

agree. I did not submit many because of that

 

[AussieDomainer]

I also held back submitting many names because of that rule. This seems very unfair.

 

[HBK216]

This issue was mentioned on the blog. Here is the original comment & Jay's answer:

Ah well, it was a tough job for them - I see names in there that were just registered, so I guess they had to bend the rules, pretty sad. I suppose I would be more understanding if at least they stuck to their guns about the 3 year minimum.

Hopefully the next time around they will have everything settled up front.

"UPDATE BY JAY: The domains that appear younger then 3 years old are actually older. They were dropped and picked up again. That is allowed, and yes they are older then 3 years."

Funny thing is one of my 6 names that shows as eligible for auction was initially denied for being too new. I resubmitted it though as it was picked up off a drop & dates back to 98.

However one has to question the legitimacy of the rule when you have .eu's in when it would be impossible for those to be 3 years old. I'm sure one's agenda is why those are in.

 

[Damion]

I'm wondering if Jay even realizes that there are .eu domains listed.
Kind of odd though.

 

[goodkarmaco]

What possibly can be the benefit of having names that are 3 years or older only?

Other than the fact that google may give more attention to an older domain, it really is all about quality and content.

Think of the brand new terms that traffic goes to today.

Hmm, sex.mobi?, nope to new of a name!

Ha-ha, that is smart, ... not!

The policy reminds me of the local arts and crafts show.

They pick a director that has some "art" background. Then the director becomes the sole decider of what is art. What is the result? A bunch a lame conservative art that is boring as hell. Hence the really good artists take their wares where they have a full audience.

 

[Kenny]

Dine.mobi?
Poker.in?

Dang good trick.

When is the final final?


Cy

 

[DropLister]

.eu is in there because Jay owns a bunch of them. If they make the rules/guidelines for submission they, surely, are the ones who can break/change them.

 

[.X.]

With that many names in violation of what they stated as the three year rule, Some how it looks as if there was some partial picking going on, Maybe there wasn't, But it sure looks that away. Thanks for bringing it to fore front ..Cyber

.eu is in there because Jay owns a bunch of them. If they make the rules/guidelines for submission they, surely, are the ones who can break/change them.

Your right, They can do anything they want, But once they set the guidelines, They should stick to them, It makes it look like crooked dealings, imo, And that isn't good for them, Nor the auction, And definatly wasn't fair to the domainers that did not submit, due to the guidelines they had set forth. Then lets throw in a few .eu .cc .tv and really stir the pot, The bottom line is, If the guidelines where changed, then they should have posted it!

 

[Spade]

I was initially happy with the idea for the .com only auction. I do think its counter productive to create rules and then change them. Because this is their first auction, I do think they are still figuring things out, but I hope with the quality of domain names in the auction (even with the poorer ones) it will attract enough buyers to make it a solid event.

Is there an issue that they aren't following their own rules? Yah... But I think after this auction, I hope it will be the last time.

Justin

 

[.X.]

I was initially happy with the idea for the .com only auction. I do think its counter productive to create rules and then change them. Because this is their first auction, I do think they are still figuring things out, but I hope with the quality of domain names in the auction (even with the poorer ones) it will attract enough buyers to make it a solid event.

Is there an issue that they aren't following their own rules? Yah... But I think after this auction, I hope it will be the last time.

Justin

I disagree ..Justin

First off, If they weren't totally prepared, The they should have passed the torch to someone that was, It being thier first auction, Is no excuse, People are flying in from around the world to attend round table seattle, You just can't make the mistakes and drop the ball like they have, And i see them doing nothing to correct it, It's not acceptable, imo

 

[gazzip]

The 3 year rule was handled badly from what I can see, I'm guessing alot of other people had names fail for being "too new" even though they were many years older :td:

oh well ! what can you do :hehe:

I'm wondering if Jay even realizes that there are .eu domains listed.
Kind of odd though.

Yeah, he knows, he mentioned it in an earlier post in the blog

Question asked) If my math is correct, a domain would have to be registered August 15, 2004 or earlier to qualify. I counted at least 39 names that did not meet this requirement, including four .eu and one .in.

I trust that any ineligible names will be removed before August 6, thereby giving some other names the opportunity to participate.

UPDATE BY JAY: .EU was not around 3 years ago. So those names are except. Poker.in is allowed in because the rules were loosened in India and now it is easy to for anyone to register a .IN. There are a billion people in India and Poker is one of the most valuable domains.

I am allowing domains that have been registered before August 15th 2004 but they may not be showing that with the date you looked at. Those domains were picked up on drops and were previously registered prior to the date. You will need to recheck the history of those domains, don’t trust the current creation date.

.

The only eu I tried to submit was SwissProperty, I'm sure there must have had quiet a few far better .eu names submitted than null !


.

 

[.X.]

The 3 year rule was handled badly from what I can see, I'm guessing alot of other people had names fail for being "too new" even though they were many years older :td:

oh well ! what can you do :hehe:



Yeah, he knows, he mentioned it in an earlier post in the blog

Question asked) If my math is correct, a domain would have to be registered August 15, 2004 or earlier to qualify. I counted at least 39 names that did not meet this requirement, including four .eu and one .in.

I trust that any ineligible names will be removed before August 6, thereby giving some other names the opportunity to participate.

UPDATE BY JAY: .EU was not around 3 years ago. So those names are except. Poker.in is allowed in because the rules were loosened in India and now it is easy to for anyone to register a .IN. There are a billion people in India and Poker is one of the most valuable domains.

I am allowing domains that have been registered before August 15th 2004 but they may not be showing that with the date you looked at. Those domains were picked up on drops and were previously registered prior to the date. You will need to recheck the history of those domains, don’t trust the current creation date.

.

The only eu I tried to submit was SwissProperty, I'm sure there must have had quiet a few far better .eu names submitted than null !


.

There's no question, there are some not so good names in the auction, GrannyKnot.com - EmptyJar.com - BS101.com and it's counter part, Just to mention a few, There are many more, But that isn't the point, I can respect what names they choose to go into the auction, I can't respect unethical conduct, Be it intentional, or unintentional, This is a big event, Dropping the ball on this is HUGE, imo, They should have asked for advisory from someone, If they couldn't handle the process

 

[gazzip]

Hey, there's not many people that can pull off something perfect the first time round !

I'm sure they are doing their best at this moment in time

.

 

[HBK216]

Hey, there's not many people that can pull off something perfect the first time round !

I'm sure they are doing their best at this moment in time

.

Doing their best & blatantly going against their own rules are two totally different things.

 

[Ronald Regging]

Doing their best & blatantly going against their own rules are two totally different things.

I agree with this. It's one thing to make a concerted effort and come up a bit short the first time around. No one is expecting perfection. But I think at the very least you need to adhere to your own policies.

Also I think this excuse of picking up names on the drop within the past 3 years is lame. No one would get on a forum advertising an 8 year old domain that was registered in March '06... Regardless of it's history, there are just standards of sales that we follow. Plus, any domain that has dropped in the past 3 years, more than likely went through a rigorous process of dropcatching, et al... If it managed to get by the sentry of domainers and picked up as a fresh reg and is truly quality... well, i'd only expect maybe 1 of those types in the entire auction... let alone 20+

 

[cache]

rules are rules.
Credibility is important.

 

[goodkarmaco]

So if flowers.mobi was sent for approval they would turn it down because it is not 3 yrs old? Throw the 3 yr. rule out and learn what qualifies a great domain.

 

[HBK216]

So if flowers.mobi was sent for approval they would turn it down because it is not 3 yrs old? Throw the 3 yr. rule out and learn what qualifies a great domain.

The example given is an ok name, not exceptional. Throwing out the rule is not a legitimate option. They went on & on about wanting a certain standard of names & implemented rules For what though as those same standards were purposely overlooked.

 

[Spade]

First off, If they weren't totally prepared, The they should have passed the torch to someone that was

Honestly, when is the first time the best? Most sites go through numerous versions and updates until they get it right. I think there are legitimate issues with this auction, but im not surprised, are you? I dont expect this to run as smoothly as they do. Thats just how it goes the first time around. There learning the lessons that will make the 2nd and 3rd auction, that much better.

Perhaps this is optimistic, but I legitimately think there intentions are good and I wish them luck with the auction.

Justin