NameSilo

The Official BQB.com Thread

NamecheapNamecheap
Watch

VURG

VURGTop Member
Impact
659
I think I started the first BQB.com auction ever. I'm not sure but it looks like it's up and running.
 
0
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
Unstoppable Domains โ€” AI StorefrontUnstoppable Domains โ€” AI Storefront
Have put some new buttons on BQB which have modified "BuyOut" to "Buy Now" as suggested by VURG and a few other buttons that overall just match BQB's colors better.
 
0
•••
Looking Slick Reece :)
 
0
•••
Reece said:
Have put some new buttons on BQB which have modified "BuyOut" to "Buy Now" as suggested by VURG and a few other buttons that overall just match BQB's colors better.

Hey Reece,

They look really nice. BQB.com is coming along really well so far.

-Bill
 
0
•••
Is BQB.com down atm?
 
0
•••
Yes it is, surprised since it seems to be hosted with dnsmadeeasy.com
A DNS service with a 100% uptime history is just the start!
mntor said:
Is BQB.com down atm?
 
0
•••
0
•••
0
•••
It looks like bqb.com does not load without the leading www. :)
 
0
•••
Had a bit of downtime this morning which cause some peculiar issues (like the one you're describing).

Not sure what the problem was -- contacted Softlayer and while they still aren't sure what caused the problem, they were able to get it back up running properly.

Kath said:
It looks like bqb.com does not load without the leading www. :)
 
0
•••
Michael_Goldman said:
mntor said:
Is BQB.com down atm?
works fine here :)
Yep it works fine now. Backup in place atm.

Kath said:
It looks like bqb.com does not load without the leading www. :)
Not really imho. I type only "bqb.com" in FF and it loads.
 
0
•••
Kath said:
It looks like bqb.com does not load without the leading www. :)

works here...
 
0
•••
Looks great! I can't get pics to load but I like the layout and features.
Another NPs member venture I will support.

namenut

Kath said:
It looks like bqb.com does not load without the leading www. :)
Loads fine for me Kath
 
0
•••
namenut said:
Loads fine for me Kath
Yes it's all fine now :)
But so many websites fall for that mistake you know ;)
 
0
•••
LLLL.com categories: I would merge the single premium and anti premium domains into the other category. If a LLLL.com has less than 2 premium letters, I don't think that categorising the domains into these categories helps the sellers in any way. I'd even question having a double premium category but I think that some people do like them.
 
0
•••
Some people are already abusing the "rare" and "pronounceable" LLLL.com categories.
 
0
•••
Thanks for the heads up mate - I'll have a fix for them soon.

Will post a warning on the site about misusing the categories and if they choose to continue doing it all their listings will have to be manually approved before being listed.

Marck said:
Some people are already abusing the "rare" and "pronounceable" LLLL.com categories.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Your going to have fun with this policing these subcategories of LLLL.com Reece.

I don't think that anyone is abusing categories. I've looked at the two categories mentioned and I don't see any that are overly out of place that I would term as abuse. I think that the definition of these categories is controversial and some people including me are listing names that other people may not consider best fitting for the domain. Reece, I am happy if you move any of my names to other categories if my interpretation of how to classify my names upsets anyone.

The categories "Rare", "Pronouceable" and "Premium" are all controversial.

When I bought Muvk(.)com, Ikqi(.)com and Qagy(.)com, I considered them pronounceable and still do to this day. I know that other people don't but I also know that most of my customers agree with me and so criticisms about what I consider pronounceable don't bother me. You can come up with your own rules to classify what is and isn't pronounceable but your always going to come up with the controversial names that some are going to consider pronounceable and others aren't.

What is rare? Aren't all domains rare as they are all unique? This is even more difficult to classify.

Then there is the premium letter debate where affected parties are constantly trying to promote one or two of J,K,U and W to be included in the premium category. At least this category is easier to classify but it does start some heated debates.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
my account reg has been approved very fast... thanks for the efficency, the site looks cool; now it will take some time to take off... advertising is the key, but I already noticed you are starting to get exposure Reece :snaphappy:
best of luck mate!
 
0
•••
I'm not going to be particularly fussy when it comes to the pronounceable category -- I can't speak every language in the world, so I'm really in no position to be telling people what names are pronounceable and which aren't.

I haven't taken a serious look at what's listed in many of the categories yet, but listing something like XYZV.com as quad premium would clearly be abusing the system. Ironically enough I made the categories the way I did intentionally so domainers could get more exposure for their names -- listing them in the wrong categories not only reduces the odds you'll find interested buyers, but hurts everyone else's names in that category.

I have made a guide in the FAQ section which goes into great detail on what each domain is and how it should be classified. Perhaps I should forward a copy to everyone :)

As you said Phil -- pronounceable is iffy and I won't be monitoring that section much, other than for the occasional name like QQVX.com in example which is clearly unpronounceable regardless of language.

VURG said:
Your going to have fun with this policing these subcategories of LLLL.com Reece.

I don't think that anyone is abusing categories. I've looked at the two categories mentioned and I don't see any that are overly out of place that I would term as abuse. I think that the definition of these categories is controversial and some people including me are listing names that other people may not consider best fitting for the domain. Reece, I am happy if you move any of my names to other categories if my interpretation of how to classify my names upsets anyone.

The categories "Rare", "Pronouceable" and "Premium" are all controversial.

When I bought Muvk(.)com, Ikqi(.)com and Qagy(.)com, I considered them pronounceable and still do to this day. I know that other people don't but I also know that most of my customers agree with me and so criticisms about what I consider pronounceable don't bother me. You can come up with your own rules to classify what is and isn't pronounceable but your always going to come up with the controversial names that some are going to consider pronounceable and others aren't.

What is rare? Aren't all domains rare as they are all unique? This is even more difficult to classify.

Then there is the premium letter debate where affected parties are constantly trying to promote one or two of J,K,U and W to be included in the premium category. At least category is easier to classify but

Thanks mate! :)

I plan on selling off a few of my better names over the next few months and want to buy a couple months of sitewide exposure on Namepros and maybe a few other forums as well.

thetruman said:
my account reg has been approved very fast... thanks for the efficency, the site looks cool; now it will take some time to take off... advertising is the key, but I already noticed you are starting to get exposure Reece :snaphappy:
best of luck mate!
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Reece, I have a question about editing an auction. I have an auction that I saved as a draft I want to make it live, but I need to edit some text that I have written about the domain before I post the auction. I don't see an edit button, can you tell me how to do this? Thanks!
 
0
•••
Dynadot โ€” .com TransferDynadot โ€” .com Transfer
Appraise.net
Escrow.com
Spaceship
Rexus Domain
CryptoExchange.com
Domain Recover
CatchDoms
DomDB
NameFit
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the pageโ€™s height.
Back