discuss So who is behind that username or avatar?

[equity78]

One of the difficult things about domaining compared to most industries is that for the most part you don’t know much if anything about the person you are conversing with, getting advice from. There are exceptions of course, people get to meet people at domain conferences, (though no one has on their badge, I am broke or I am a scammer). There are also high profile domainers who share a lot and use their real name.

Opinions or advice without knowing anything behind the person giving them are pretty empty imo.

You get people who give opinions on names in appraisal sections and you have no idea if they know anything about the industry said name belongs to. Do they know anything about linguistics, branding? No?

The value of that opinion is reg fee, like so many domains are appraised at reg fee. The theory for some goes if someone paid $9 for it then it can’t be worthless, others would differ in their opinion. So the same goes for people, you have the right to speak and to give an opinion, but it equates to reg fee.

Same goes with negotiation advice, some people give very bad advice in forums and blog comments. For the person seeking negotiation advice, all they know is MetallicaFan has a sweet avatar but might not even know how to negotiate for an extra .50 an hour at their job.

The worst advice in my opinion, comes from those anonymous sources who are giving legal advice. “You tell that company to go f themselves!” “I would ignore it, you have every right to own a name with Instagram it.” Yeah might be better to contact Berryhill or Lieberman. The truth is most domainers who participate on forums and blogs know very little to nothing about TM law and intellectual property.

Another thing that happens with not knowing the people you interact with is there are many false narratives that get built up.

This is Domaining When The Legend Becomes Fact Print The Legend

One tidbit that surprised a lot of people came up in the CQD.com case on Namepros. James Booth had unknowingly bought a stolen domain, that belonged to a lady in Florida.

One of the hot takes of that thread was some people who never met or knew anything about Mr.Booth, declaring he was a millionaire and that he should just eat the loss, he can afford it.

To which Mr. Booth posted:



I had a couple people say to me they were flabbergasted that Booth was not a millionaire. I asked the one person if they ever met James or knew anything about him? They just figured that they saw him mentioned on Namepros and DNJournal so he was rich.

You have to do your homework in the business and verify from more than one source if you are going to spend money, or make a deal.

There was a thread on Namepros where someone was going to make a large purchase for a domain name because of a previous sale that they saw mentioned. The sale was not a sale but just an auction close that never got paid. You can read it here, it’s long and sometimes confusing.

The takeaway is not confusing though, you need to do your homework thoroughly, you need to be meticulous before making a decision that affects your domain business.

In this business no one really knows a lot about anyone. Hopefully you know yourself and go from there. Best of luck.

 

[WatchDogue]

" So who is behind that username or avatar? ", is a topic well worth a discussion.

This Forum is so large, broad - based and, generally anonymous that readers must make their own determination who, if anyone, is providing sound or reasonable advice without the benefit of the provider's resume or vitae.

As a Forum reader I'll state that several, though not all of the top content / opinion posters on the Forum
( IMO ) use their own name as their username which adds credibility to their postings.

As with all business endeavors the reader must use caution and discretion in acquiring their data prior to making a purchase or relying on that data for costly investments.

I believe most NP posters are sincere and well meaning when posting their advice or comments in response to those members who post and ask for advice and comments from the broad membership with it's variant levels of experience, knowledge and skills.

Caveat Emptor is always the best guideline for domain purchases and investments regardless of whose opinions and advice you choose to follow.

Who is behind my avatar - A person who acquired his first domain for personal use in 1996 - acquired many others over the years both for personal usage and potential - eventual sale, has sold domains only through inbound, recognizes his domain areas of reasonable competency and tries to limit his comments to those areas and, scrupulously avoids offering advice in the vast domain sea in which he knows he is non - competent.

 

[MapleDots]

Who is behind my avatar?

A Business Man, A domain investor, An owner of successful online stores, A ex business Manager of a multi million dollar corporation, An successful stock market entrepreneur, A real Estate Investor, and A previous large forum owner.

But most of all I am a father of two young children and a husband to the love of my life. I live to be an example they can be proud of. I show them your word is your bond, I tell them to behave as if the world is watching.

I strive to be transparent and have done tens of thousands of dollars in transactions via namepros on handshakes. I have built a trust relationship with every member I have done business with.

I am proud to be on namepros but much more than that, I want namepros to be proud of me.

Post with sincerity, truly offer to help and remember that your online presence will be around long after your time on earth is done.

My name is Frank, I am MapleDots, and I am happy to be transparent about it.
Transparency builds trust and relationships.

Me and my son

 

[hawkeye]

I believe most NP posters are sincere and well meaning when posting their advice or comments in response to those members who post and ask for advice and comments

They may be, but ‘sincere and well meaning’ does not equate to ‘knowledgeable, informed or correct’ which is what a posting member is seeking when they ask. Way too many feel that ‘just’ being an NP member quantifies them as experienced to reply as such! (Thus then, the back and forth quipping begins!)

 

[Andrew Knox]

The Pro badge seems like a decent filter given the eligibility requirements

https://www.namepros.com/pages/how-to-join-the-pro-network/

Not to say that you should just blindly follow Pros' advice but they have some real world experience at least..

 

[Bob Hawkes]

This is an excellent idea for a thread and I thank you for starting it @equity78. A lot to think about in what you wrote.

One point that your examples highlights is that different questions require different types of expertise, and ideally you need a match between the question and type of expertise. If someone is looking for suggestions in negotiating a big transaction, ideally hear from someone who does those! If seeking statistical trends, then someone who knows how to use the database effectively, basic math, and caveats re biases in data is more important.

I think the most important thing is to give honest, current and balanced advice. By balanced I would prefer someone to, even though it takes more words, give me the arguments/evidence in favour of each option, and then let me decide rather than simplify it to a one liner.

It is very important to clearly show any potential conflicts of interest.

One idea that was going around in my head today is that perhaps with almost no technical change the information section on NPs could be made more useful if we wanted to have some sort of standard expertise statement there.

As to real identity, I can see the arguments each way. I respect those who choose to have only a username and no link to their portfolio so you can learn anything more about what they have. I also respect those who choose not to release sales data. I wish more at the very minimum had a link to their domain holdings.

Ultimately, no one should depend solely on any other person's advice. As a community the more we build ways to help people build expertise to make better decisions themselves, the more we are doing the right thing.

Bob

 

[Chris Hydrick]

Opinions or advice without knowing anything behind the person giving them are pretty empty imo.

Agreed**

** With the exception of the opinion or advice given with detailed research, cited by reputable sources.

I'm skeptical about sales reports. And don't necessarily consider them reputable as that sale is relevant to what that specific buyer was willing to spend at that point in time. New buyer, new point in time, same or similar domain, different situation likely equating to aa differen sales price.

I wonder how a debate, or a research paper would turn out, if you paired the undisputed subject matter expert (using only his/her mind. No books, no internet) against the undisputed best internet researcher.

The subject matter expert will depend on their knowledge to quickly connect the dots to formulate an argument.

Whereas, the internet researcher, will have the ability to quote the works, and opinions of other subject matter experts to connect the dots of their argument.

Will the internet researchers lack of real world subject matter understanding cause them to miss the point?

I think the kicker to the question would be time.

How much time would the internet researcher need to spend researching before being considered a subject matter expert?

And how much more time will it take an internet researcher to formulate their research, compared to the subject matter expert speaking from experience.

Point being, I think there is something to learn from both sides.

Most subject matter experts have more important things to do with their time than spend hours researching and debating on a forum. They can also process and determine the relevance faster than an internet researcher. Whereas internet researchers may not have more important things to do (well, they likely do, and are just putting it off) and is willing to put the research time in, with the hopes of an intelligent exchange with the subject matter expert.

When the subject matter expert and internet researcher spend the same amount of time, and same resources on a post, the subject matter expert, almost every time, provides more value than the internet researcher.

So how much time is one internet researcher to spend on a post to provide value to the subject matter expert?

Too much length, you're just wasting their time.

Too much uneducated opinions, you're just wasting their time.

...

I think I've learned a lot from two nP members who I know nothing about. And I think they prefer it that way too. But, boy have I learned a lot from them. You (other nP members) probably have too.

 

[offthehandle]

But did you ask Rick? Lol.

https://mobile.twitter.com/DomainKing/status/1130487652627701760

I asked the one person if they ever met James or knew anything about him?

 

[xynames]

What’s in a name anyway?

On the internet Content is what matters most.

 

[xynames]

Plus doesn’t this come down to the question of who knows and who blows?

 

[equity78]

But did you ask Rick? Lol.

https://mobile.twitter.com/DomainKing/status/1130487652627701760

HAHAHAHAHA No and I never saw that tweet, thanks for posting it.

 

[equity78]

This is an excellent idea for a thread and I thank you for starting it @equity78. A lot to think about in what you wrote.

One point that your examples highlights is that different questions require different types of expertise, and ideally you need a match between the question and type of expertise. If someone is looking for suggestions in negotiating a big transaction, ideally hear from someone who does those! If seeking statistical trends, then someone who knows how to use the database effectively, basic math, and caveats re biases in data is more important.

I think the most important thing is to give honest, current and balanced advice. By balanced I would prefer someone to, even though it takes more words, give me the arguments/evidence in favour of each option, and then let me decide rather than simplify it to a one liner.

It is very important to clearly show any potential conflicts of interest.

One idea that was going around in my head today is that perhaps with almost no technical change the information section on NPs could be made more useful if we wanted to have some sort of standard expertise statement there.

As to real identity, I can see the arguments each way. I respect those who choose to have only a username and no link to their portfolio so you can learn anything more about what they have. I also respect those who choose not to release sales data. I wish more at the very minimum had a link to their domain holdings.

Ultimately, no one should depend solely on any other person's advice. As a community the more we build ways to help people build expertise to make better decisions themselves, the more we are doing the right thing.

Bob

Some good points Bob and I want to make clear the purpose of the article was not people need to start giving their real information. It was more that nobody really ever knows anybody.

The other point you made that's very true is different people excel in different things and not everyone is completely well rounded, there are a couple people I know that are very smart, we talk analytically all the time, but the one has always told me, "I would crap my pants if I got a $50,000 offer, and would have no idea how to negotiate" They have never sold a domain name for more than $1,500 and how they put it, $50,000 to $100,000 on a domain sale would change their lives in a big way. But when it comes to analytical thinking they are very smart and their opinion is worthwhile.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

They have never sold a domain name for more than $1,500 and how they put it, $50,000 to $100,000 on a domain sale would change their lives in a big way. But when it comes to analytical thinking they are very smart and their opinion is worthwhile.

Well said.

...

Playing devil's advocate...

Whereas somebody who is in a different financial situation, and a $50,000 or $100,000 domain sale doesn't effect their lives in a big way. Does their financial situation alone make their opinion worthwhile? Or worth more than that of the person where a $50,000 domain sale change their life in a big way? Financial situations aren't always a reflection of ones technical (analytical) ability. Nor does strong analytical thinking always result in a worthwhile opinion. More times than not? Sure. But not always.

Why wouldn't a $50,000 to $100,000 domain sale change somebody's life in a big way?

(a) What was their initial purchase price / how much money do they have in the domain -- development, renewals, hosting, etc? The seller may only be making a small profit, or huge loss.

(b) You don't know the source of the income to purchase the domain and/or their annual liabilities. It may be the original registrant's college money from the early 90's, resulting in years of missed opportunity with funds tied up in domain renewals, resulting in a life's fortune. Or, it could be a giant money laundering play. Or some guy who hit big on daily fantasy sports wanting to get in on new gTLDs. Ok. Well not so sure a $50,000 domain sale wouldn't effect that guys life in a big way. Moving on...

(c) The seller might eat $50,000 to $100,000 sales for breakfast. Seller is either very in tune with the market, or well off enough from other affairs, to feel comfortable enough continually buying premium domains at a wholesale price, to either sell at end-user pricing, or develop themselfs or in partnership.

...

Or to put it another way, all of us analytical thinkers where $50,000 is life changing, spend a lot of time playing with trucks in the sandbox. Not much can go wrong in a sand box, and ideas are much easier to scale in a smaller model.

VS

those where $50,000 sales don't effect them. They tend play with heavy machinery. They can peep in at the analytics going on in the sandbox, but most of the sand box creations are either not worth real life construction time, or aren't scalable.

This is where the opinion of those familiar with heavy machinery is needed. They might not spend as much time thinking as the analytic bee's, but they have their finger on the pulse of big development, and what happens behind the big picture scenes.

This comment reminds me (a little bit) of a Paul DePodesta.

 

[equity78]

Well said.

...

Playing devil's advocate...

Whereas somebody who is in a different financial situation, and a $50,000 or $100,000 domain sale doesn't effect their lives in a big way. Does their financial situation alone make their opinion worthwhile? Or worth more than that of the person where a $50,000 domain sale change their life in a big way? Financial situations aren't always a reflection of ones technical (analytical) ability. Nor does strong analytical thing always result in a worthwhile opinion. More times than not? Sure. But not always.

Why wouldn't a $50,000 to $100,000 domain sale change somebody's life in a big way?

(a) What was their initial purchase price / how much money do they have on the domain -- development, renewals, hosting, etc? The seller may only be making a small profit, or huge loss.

(b) You don't know the source of the income to purchase the domain and/or their annual liabilities. It may be the original registrant's college money from the early 90's, resulting in years of missed opportunity with funds tied up in domain renewals, resulting in a life's fortune. Or, it could be a giant money laundering play. Or some guy who hit big on daily fantasy sports wanting to get in on new gTLDs. Ok. Well not so sure a $50,000 wouldn't effect that guys life in a big way. Moving on...

(c) The seller might eat $50,000 to $100,000 sales for breakfast. Seller is either very in tune with the market, or well off enough from other affairs, to feel comfortable enough continually buying premium domains at a wholesale price, to either sell at end-user pricing, or develop themselfs or in partnership.

...

Or to put it another way, all of us analytical thinkers where $50,000 is life changing, spend a lot of time playing with trucks in the sandbox. Not much can go wrong in a sand box, and ideas are much easier to scale in a smaller model.

VS

those where $50,000 sales don't effect them. They tend play with heavy machinery. They can peep in at the analytics going on in the sandbox, but most of the sand box creations are either not worth real life construction time, or aren't scalable.

This is where the opinion of those familiar with heavy machinery is needed. They might not spend as much time thinking as the analytic bee's, but they have their finger on the pulse of big development, and what happens behind the big picture scenes.

This comment reminds me (a little bit) of a Paul DePodesta.

I don't think I wrote that having anything to do with the value of their opinion, I was replying to Bob's part about different skill sets. What that person was relaying to me that they would have no good advice to give when it came to negotiations because they didn't know how to do it, and would be very nervous if presented with a big offer.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

I don't think I wrote that having anything to do with the value of their opinion, I was replying to Bob's part about different skill sets. What that person was relaying to me that they would have no good advice to give when it came to negotiations because they didn't know how to do it, and would be very nervous if presented with a big offer.

Got it. My bad.

I misread the 'but' in transition for the life changing part as relating to ones opinion. Rather than the life changing part relating to the crapping of his/her pants when presented with that kind offer.

I might also be needing a diaper upon receiving such an offer. But I've already gone through enough diapers with fake or unfulfilled purchase initiations, I'm not crapping my pants until I know for sure it's a real offer, or funds received.