discuss Rule About Untrue Content

[Bob Hawkes]

When I read the NPs rules I don't specifically see a rule about knowingly posting information which is untrue, but in my mind there should be such a rule.

One might argue that the rule about being professional covers it, but it does not directly say it is wrong to post something untrue. I presume saying something untrue about NPs would be covered by that rule. But not in general, at least as far as I could see, is there a rule saying you are breaking the rules if you post untrue content.

I think it is important to have such a rule in order to both protect companies and individuals from being hurt by untruthful "statements" . I understand that members are responsible for what they post according to NPs TOS, but I don't think that is enough.

All of us are hurt by untrue statements, even when they do not apply directly to us, as it may lead us to make incorrect decisions or at the very least we are all harmed when NPs contains misleading and attacking material with untruthful statements.

Note I am not talking here about opinions. Yes some may think appraisals have worth and others they don't - that is an opinion. Some may think any particular TLD has a strong future and others do not. Some may think a certain domain has value and others do not. Those are opinions. I am talking about calling a sale fake when there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary, or saying a company is dishonest when really they are simply following their TOS which you did not read.

Anyway, just my opinion. Hopefully those who control this wonderful forum will give it at least careful consideration. I really appreciate all the work you do to keep this forum as great as it is (and that statement is 100% true!).

Bub

 

[Eric Lyon]

Please keep the following Terms of Use in mind that all users agree to when using and signing up to NamePros:

You agree to not use the Service to submit or link to any Content that is abusive, unlawfully defamatory, hateful, threatening, spam or spam-like, likely to offend, contains adult or objectionable content (except in explicitly designated areas), contains personal information of others, risks copyright infringement, encourages unlawful activity, or otherwise violates any laws

For what it's worth, it's not something that any of us like either. As I understand it, there isn't much that can be done about it because:

• It'd be impractical (time wise, expertise wise, etc.) to be the judge, jury, and executioner of truth on everything that users post. That is for the community to decide based on what users choose to post
• It'd increase liability and make it difficult/impossible for a large website of user-generated content to exist.
• It'd be infeasible (resources wise) to curate/approve or validate/investigate all potentially untrue content. That isn't something that can be done partially or some of the time. If you do it, then you could be seen as a publisher, which could make you responsible for everything, and anything you miss could become a serious (service ending) liability.

It's unfortunate but I think this is one of those times when everyone has to take the good with the bad in order for a service like NamePros to be able to exist.

Thanks for understanding,

 

[Internet.Domains]

I am talking about calling a sale fake when there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary, or saying a company is dishonest when really they are simply following their TOS which you did not read.

Regarding fake sales. We have seen throughout the years some domain sales, when pressed, bring more questions than answers. Facts often differ from the commentary. There are and have been legitimate reasons to question certain sales. Trying to silence those on a fact finding mission only hurts the community, not helps.

There have been many community efforts that have made reported sales questionable. It is important everyone makes their own conclusion by knowing all possible facts. Not just the one sided "facts."

 

[Bob Hawkes]

Thanks for your detailed reply, @Eric Lyon and as always your points all make sense. Just to clarify to others reading this thread, my idea was never to try to moderate and remove untrue content, which I realize as you say below is totally not feasible. Rather, when a post is reported, I was surprised that I can't it seems report a post any reasonable person would find untrue by referencing a NamePros rule about posting untrue material. If the entity being attacked is not a NP member I can't use that rule, so the closest is unprofessional which seems rather vague.

It'd be infeasible (resources wise) to curate/approve or validate/investigate all potentially untrue content.

I do realize and accept that having a rule might be a slippery slope though where NPs would have to adjudicate and possibly share responsibility for decisions and the risk associated with that. It seems to me inconsistent though to have a rule re posting content without attribution or content that promotes fraudulent activities, but not one about posting untruthful content that does harm to companies or individuals.

We have seen throughout the years some domain sales, when pressed, bring more questions than answers. Facts often differ from the commentary. There are and have been legitimate reasons to question certain sales.

Thanks for your contribution @Internet.Domains. Just to be clear to all reading this post my intention was not in any way to discourage being vigilant and asking questions. It is one thing to say "all sales from x registry are fake" (without any evidence in support of the statement) and quite another to say "I noticed that there was a listed sale of x.z domain but it is still listed for sale and there does not seem to be a change in Whois. What gives?"

Similarly I think it is totally fine for NPs members to say: "This happened to me at XXX and I wanted to share so it won't happen to you." And then share an accurate account of what happened. It is quite another to anonymously start a thread with a title like "XX Stole my Name" or similar when really what happened is the company followed exactly the TOS that you agreed to. Yes, if there is something unusual in the TOS do emphasize that to us all. But words like fake, stole, fraud, lies, cheat should only be used if there is a clear evidentiary record that a reasonable unbiased person would accept as proven.

Bob

 

[Eric Lyon]

It seems to me inconsistent though to have a rule re posting content without attribution or content that promotes fraudulent activities, but not one about posting untruthful content that does harm to companies or individuals.

As I understand it, there’s a big difference between a copyright issue and defamation, and the two laws are not related so you have to treat them differently. The issues I explained about un/true content do not arise regarding copyright material. On the contrary, you need to remove copyrighted material when brought to your attention through the proper channels. From what I’ve read regarding un/true content, you lose protection once you break the seal by acting like a publisher in any way (Explained in my previous post).

If the content is untrue, then you can address it (Legally or otherwise) with the poster. If a judge demands that the poster remove it or retract it, then we’d be able to help with that because we haven’t made any decisions ourselves about it (And haven’t broken the seal).

Hope that helps,

 

[karmaco]

I don’t think we need anymore censorship. People are pretty good myself included in reporting offensive stuff, vulgar, fighting and rule breaking in the wanted and sales section.

I agree it is a slippery slope on vetting an entire forum. People must take all forum posts with a grain of salt.

One way this could close down the info posted here is numerous names reported as sold at major platforms are being reported with an untrue selling price because the 2 nd or 3rd bidder got it etc. I don't want these threads to go away because the figures may be off.

As far as rude or insulting posts just report.

 

[karmaco]

Another point, I want people to be able to tell their experiences within this business and the various businesses we deal with. If they have a bad experience they should be able to post about it. That’s one of the best things about this forum.

 

[johnnie018]

Bob, what would you say for the following sales?

-Beauty.cc sold for $1million
-Fund.com sold for $10million
-Vacation.rentals sold for $500,000

How will mods decide which doubtful sales people can say are fake and which people cannot say are fake?

 

[johnnie018]

Regarding fake sales. We have seen throughout the years some domain sales, when pressed, bring more questions than answers. Facts often differ from the commentary. There are and have been legitimate reasons to question certain sales. Trying to silence those on a fact finding mission only hurts the community, not helps.

There have been many community efforts that have made reported sales questionable. It is important everyone makes their own conclusion by knowing all possible facts. Not just the one sided "facts."

Well said.

 

[EbookLover]

If someone is lying or is just posting false information (be it knowingly or unknowingly), you can challenge them with facts if you like. No reasonable person would ever stop you from or hate you for doing that, and it is definitely welcome by any community be it NP or otherwise.

But that level of policing and censorship would be downright time-consuming and unnecessary for mods and site owners and would be, to me, appalling, quite frankly.

 

[johnnie018]

But that level of policing and censorship would be downright time-consuming and unnecessary for mods and site owners and would be, to me, appalling, quite frankly.

Agree, "appalling" is the right word for that type of censorship.