Who should NOT insult you - but it seems do

[TheBaldOne]

I have a particular domain hack of a certain US State, brilliant, love it, and especially brilliant from my point of view is that the .com is so badly developed it has an Alexa rank of over 1.9 million.

Well I am getting out of domaining as such, just selling the last few of the domains I am not in the process of developing. Well it struck me today that with this particular domain it could be a great asset for either of the two major political parties in the US, so I emailed both of them and let them know that the domain was for sale, making sure that I was therefore unbiased because as a non-US citizen it would be wrong of me to try and influence commercially the politics of the US.

Anyway, within minutes of emailing the Democratic party I was asked basically to give them the domain because of their 'obvious limited resources'. I replied questioning 'their limited resources' and pointing out how much they spend on net, tv, and radio advertising and that it was illegal for them to ask a foreign national for a 'gift' and it would be illegal for me to make a 'gift'.

The next email from the individual then ends up by referring to me as " you retromingent wackadoo". Now those that know me may or may not agree with the description, but I find it strange that an official of one of the two major US parties would refer to someone like this.

So the upshot of it is simple, if you ever think about doing business with the Democrats from Wisconsin get ready to be insulted by Mr. Graeme Zielinski, their Communications Director, to become hostile and insult you if you are not willing to participate with him and/or the Democratic Party of Wisconsin in breaking the law, US law that is.

And just to think I was actually rooting for the Democrats.

 

[enlytend]

The United States Federal Trade Commission defines spam here:
Quote:
Unwanted commercial email – also known as "spam"

That's an over-simplified consumer-oriented page. Personalized "first contact" inquiries are not considered spam (though they may be unwelcome.)

If it's unsolicited AND "bulk", then it's spam. Or if you send repeated emails to someone who's told you not to contact them again.

 

[DU]

If it's unsolicited AND "bulk", then it's spam. Or if you send repeated emails to someone who's told you not to contact them again.

Isn't this an oversimplied domainer view. Or do you have a legal source?

Specific FTC guidelines:

http://business.ftc.gov/documents/bus61-can-spam-act-compliance-guide-business

 

[Kate]

5) I sent an email to him and some of his colleagues, one email each, this was not SPAMMING them, it was introducing myself and the item I had for sale.

That's where the problem begins.
In many organizations, E-mails are automatically dispatched to multiple recipients on arrival, forwarded, and colleagues talk to each other.
I can understand that multiple E-mails of a commercial nature are perceived to be intrusive.
Why not identify THE decision maker and send one single E-mail ?

No party is going to put their name on an INdian Hack let alone in Wiscons.in

In general yes but in America everything is possible :lol:
http://www.house.mn/

 

[TheBaldOne]

Defaultuser, thank you for the link in post # 27 above, I have just read through it and it appears I HAVE NOT broken 'CAN_SPAM ACT' in any way whatsoever! :bingo:

Great news, thank you.

Sdsinc, love the link to www.house.mn

Problem with identifying a decision maker is how do you identify amongst politicos who is the decision maker?

 

[DU]

who is the decision maker?

Why the voters, of course!

 

[DU]

In general yes but in America everything is possible :lol:
http://www.house.mn/

But are there multiple MYJOBISGOINGTOMN.com type sites?

 

[TheBaldOne]

Defaultuser, that is why domain hacks are such good value, they are making an impression, and a growing impression both in number of sales and value of sales - much to some domainers' disgust though it would seem.

 

[enlytend]

DU - You in a bad mood or something today? The page you cited wasn't resolving for me, but I found this lawyer's summary, which sums up the key points of CAN-SPAM as I understand it:

The CAN-SPAM Act has three provisions to which spammers must adhere:

· The first is labeling. Unsolicited e-mails must be clearly identified as solicitation or advertisements for products and services.

· The second is offering an opt-out option. Senders must provide easily accessible, legitimate means for recipients to "opt-out" of receiving future messages.

· The third is the revelation of the sender's addresses. Unsolicited e-mails must contain legitimate return e-mail addresses, as well as the sender's postal address.

http://www.bicklaw.com/publications/Overview_Cam-spam_act.htm

Unsolicited commercial emails are not "spam", as long as it is identified as an advertisement/promotion, you provide (and honor) an "opt-out", and you have legitimate sender data, including a postal address and non-spoofed message headers.

PS - your link finally resolved - where on that page does it say something other than I stated above and in my first post

 

[eyedomainous]

People are often rude to unsolicited callers trying to sell something. Its customary for some, and the main reason they respond at all. Other than to see if they can get something for free.

Get over it. Thank them for giving you the courtesy of a reply. And move on. Folks remember polite professionalism, it often makes them regret being rude... and, sometimes, they reconsider.

Did someone from the 'other party' take the time to give you a personal reply?​

 

[DU]

DU - You in a bad mood or something today?:

Perhaps subconsciously. I'm not having a good week at all and sometimes I do lose my manners. Apologies if it seems that way.

PS - your link finally resolved - where on that page does it say something other than I stated above and in my first post

Your first post states:

Personalized "first contact" inquiries are not considered spam

They are unless you meet the criteria for valid headers, contact information, etc. that you mention in this last post. This is not the same as what I (and I assume othere perceive) as personalized which is just saying "Hey Joe" and then referring to something unique that shows you've done "research".

If it's unsolicited AND "bulk", then it's spam.

The link states that specifically that spam doesn't just apply to bulk. It is each and every email that doesn't explicitly follow the rules. Obviously if they opt out then your "bulk" comes into play.

It's all technicalities imho and just about everyone violates them to some extent - the problems seem to arise when you really abuse the system (there's a thread on those people ) or you get someone with a bad experience on the other end.

GoDaddy doesn't like being told you did something wrong from what I hear (don't send your email from your GoDaddy account domain).

Chances are that if you are polite and not a jerk and don't use a hotmail account and you send only the one personalized email like you said you're not going to get into too much trouble.

 

[enlytend]

They are unless you meet the criteria for valid headers, contact information, etc. that you mention in this last post. This is not the same as what I (and I assume othere perceive) as personalized which is just saying "Hey Joe" and then referring to something unique that shows you've done "research".

Yep. (It would never occur to me NOT to do those things on a business email, but I'm weird like that .)

GoDaddy doesn't like being told you did something wrong from what I hear (don't send your email from your GoDaddy account domain).

If they get a complaint, Godaddy drops the hammer first then lets you clear yourself later.

 

[DU]

Yep. (It would never occur to me NOT to do those things on a business email, but I'm weird like that .)

You used the word "business".

That separates you from many

 

[enlytend]

You used the word "business".

That separates you from many

Not only that - I can use the word "retromingent"* in a sentence!


(Gotta :hearts: NP.)

 

[johname]

You lost me at asking the two major partys to buy a hack

House.mn a full desirable word before the dot. The fact that is used that way wouldnt make be feel better about a goverment use of a dot in hack. (neat post thanks sdsinc)

Judging by our appraisal thread over the years, I would guess the two party's are inundated with political domain offers.

Just because the two partys spend a boat load of cash on tv commercials doesnt mean they can throw their money around, it is after all donated to them to use judicially in the most productive fashion.

You are asking people for money that are used to being the ones asking for money. Could very well be that nobody you talked to were authorized to send money out, only to take it in. And it would be wasting their superiors time forwarding the offer.

"I was therefore unbiased because as a non-US citizen it would be wrong of me to try and influence commercially the politics of the US." This statement feels odd and might have given the impression that there was a higher goal here than money=thinking there was a donation chance.

I am guessing your not asking them to see an ebay auction thats starting at a $1 with no reserve.

BUT I fully agreed that a party official shoud be more gracious in their saying they have no interest in paying for the name.

Perhaps if he thought you where an eligible voter he would treat you better

This is a sale you do in the "off seaon" in my opinion

Goodluck with the name

 

[Weber]

Just consider the source of such a rude reply, TBO. They are doing much worse to U.S. citizens by publicly insulting our intelligence, virtually every day, at the moment.

 

[sky]

No representative of any organisation (terrorist organisations/ drug cartels/ robbery gangs/ trafficking gangs excluded) should allow themselves to be 'caught' being that rude in such a scenario! He was obviously taking the mick when he asked for the name to be donated due to limited resources. Mr Communications Director could have NOT replied! There is a delete/spam/purge button for emails you consider spam!

Nonsense. Just deleting SPAM doesn't do much to communicate dissatisfaction back to the the intrusive SPAMMER. I notice you didn't just passively ignore my thread but clicked 'dislike' on it. You don't see anything hypocritical about that?

---------- Post added at 03:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:42 AM ----------

Defaultuser, thank you for the link in post # 27 above, I have just read through it and it appears I HAVE NOT broken 'CAN_SPAM ACT' in any way whatsoever! :bingo:

Great news, thank you.

Sdsinc, love the link to www.house.mn

Problem with identifying a decision maker is how do you identify amongst politicos who is the decision maker?

You were peddling your stuff. How would you like it if someone came to your door if you were having a quiet breakfast on a Sunday morning, mellow and went into some spiel telling you about this great deal which appeared to you to be completely ridiculously high prices for something that you were not in the market for at all, and actually considered absurd? Because to me that's the same kind of thing you did to that organization by flooding them with a sales message. I don't think it was an appropriate domain (due to the .IN extension) for a US political party, and I can completely understand why they considered you a pest and a bit out of touch.

Having said that, I will probably do some discreet e-mailing at some point to sell a domain that I think an end user might be interested in, but I won't send it to a bunch of people in the org, and if they reply in an irritated way I will certainly understand. It's reasonable for them to be frustrated and incumbent upon me to understand the nature of the situation.

You're acting like you're a saint with exquisite acumen, but but I don't see either. There are some errors in your approach and your trumped up indignation. If you're going to spam people selling a squatted on name for 4 figures and you get flamed, just accept it and move on. That's a small price to pay for ultimately making a sale when you do find someone open to your approach and domain name, and seems a lot more mature and objective than how you've handled it. I would expect no less from myself.

 

[TheBaldOne]

Sky, you are funny. Ah well, there are all sorts in the domaining business, me, you, and everyone else on this forum and others.

Oh, and by the way, it wasn't Sunday, he replied within a few minutes of receiving my email asking me to give it to them and tried misleading me about their finances. Of course he wasn't interested in the domain, that's why he asked for it as a gift!

Besides which how I behave affects me, my family, and possibly a few friends, how Zielinsky behaves reflects on the whole State organisation of his party and indeed reflects on the party nationally - in my opinion, and it is just that, when such a person behaves the way he did then the party must look on him as a liability. Politicians and those who work for them are after peoples support and favour, he I would suggest is a 'negative' in that category.

Anyway, it is all fun, have a very nice day.

 

[sky]

Sky, you are funny.

It's a gift.

Oh, and by the way, it wasn't Sunday, he replied within a few minutes of receiving my email asking me to give it to them and tried misleading me about their finances. Of course he wasn't interested in the domain, that's why he asked for it as a gift!

My point is that when you intrude into people's reality trying to peddle stuff you have a good chance of irritating or disturbing them and shouldn't be shocked. You're the one taking that chance/gamble for your own gain. I'm not being holier than though about you *trying* to get some business from a business. I'm just saying all this BS about how hot your domain is, how much he wanted it, how he's a criminal and how you acted so indignant about his little tempest-in-a-teapot reaction and blew it up into a whole partisan/state-wide issue is just ludicrous and egregiously one-sided.

Besides which how I behave affects me, my family, and possibly a few friends, how Zielinsky behaves reflects on the whole State organisation of his party and indeed reflects on the party nationally - in my opinion, and it is just that, when such a person behaves the way he did then the party must look on him as a liability. Politicians and those who work for them are after peoples support and favour, he I would suggest is a 'negative' in that category.

Anyway, it is all fun, have a very nice day.

How Mr. Z replies to a domain-squatter who spammed his organization with a pretty much useless $10 domain for $XXXX is par for the course and has about zero impact on the campaign at the end of the day. You traipse into the rough-and-tumble world of politics, campaigning and campaign-financing and then you're shocked to find out that they don't roll out out the red carpet of diplomacy. I just think you lack introspection and objectivity. But whatever, the dead horse has been beaten back into quantum particles by now.

 

[TheBaldOne]

How Mr. Z replies to a domain-squatter

Ah well, I guess all us 'domain-squatters' are really bad people. So people who invest in domain names and sell them are 'domain-squatters' are we? Well why the hell do you belong to a forum that is full to the rafters of people you term 'domain-squatters'?

I did not spam him or them under any definition of the law. But according to your totally idiotic and unreasoned argument I am a domain-squatter! Hell, I bet you just really impressed a heck of a lot of people on this forum.

Sky, as I said in a previous post, you are so funny.

(Oh, by the way, how is it that suddenly from not knowing anything about domain hacks you now think you can value them?)

 

[sky]

Ah well, I guess all us 'domain-squatters' are really bad people. So people who invest in domain names and sell them are 'domain-squatters' are we? Well why the hell do you belong to a forum that is full to the rafters of people you term 'domain-squatters'?

I did not spam him or them under any definition of the law. But according to your totally idiotic and unreasoned argument I am a domain-squatter! Hell, I bet you just really impressed a heck of a lot of people on this forum.

Sky, as I said in a previous post, you are so funny.

(Oh, by the way, how is it that suddenly from not knowing anything about domain hacks you now think you can value them?)

You're deliberately ducking the clarifications and context I gave for each of my claims. We are all domain squatters in the sense that people who buy domains primarily to resell at a profit are squatting on domains and preventing other people from buying them at reg value, and sitting on them until someone comes along that needs it enough to pay a much higher price. But I understand the game and the market and I participate in it and understand that's just how it is. I'm just a bit more honest about it than you are. I know what I'm up to and can admit it and put it into perspective.

Also, you're trying to nuance the definition of SPAM, as if the literal definition of SPAM is what was at issue and why you got flamed by that guy. But that's not the point at all. I said you were invasively peddling your crap where it wasn't appreciated, and got scolded for it. I just said you should know that some people aren't going to receive unsolicited marketing of something they can't appreciate the value of like that very well, and be prepared to take it on the chin and not whine all over the place that you're under-appreciated by barbarians.

And the other point isn't whether wiscons.in is worth $x,xxx in the big market. I don't give a crap. Maybe that's what it's worth, maybe it isn't, but a lot of people won't see its value the way you do. I even do some domaining, and personally think think it's probably worth about $10 - $20 in the ultimate scheme of things. So, if me, a quasi-experienced domainer think that, what is completely uninformed guy going to think? That's why the guy thought you're a retromingent wackadoo. The point isn't the rarified valuation of the domain but who you marketed it to and how. And I know you know the point I was making.

So in all three courses you're playing dumb and twisting my claims. I just don't find you particularly objective or honest.

 

[TheBaldOne]

Sky - you are so, so funny! :cy:

 

[sky]

Sky - you are so, so funny! :cy:

What would be really funny would be if you register SP.AM and send e-mail to everyone at Buckingham Palace telling them you want the reduced price of $1,000,000,000 for it, and tell them names like that typically appraise for much more.