Comments on: Wikipedia Says Domainers are Cybersquatters

By: SteveC

SteveC — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 14:14:09 +0000

Amen brother Menius.

It is difficult to believe some of the stunts these “clowns” are trying>. The thought that keeps me going is you can not mess around with reality by publishing incorrect information that includes outright lies. It appears that some of the previous administration’s flunkies are out of work and scrapping the bottom of the barrel to get work.

It is time to move on and label Wikipedia wnat it has become. The hijacking by unreputable folks has tarnished it and it is now not a trusted source. All of my work, hours and hours, has been totally removed. There is no trace of it and I am blocked using my regular login.

This is a call to all domainers. Pull what strings you can, talk to everyone you know and let’s get this thing in perspective for the rest of the world.

By: Andrew Allemann

Andrew Allemann — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 02:16:47 +0000

@ David – it’s gone now. Akismet doesn’t block 100%, but it’s amazing that got through.

By: David

David — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 23:45:22 +0000

The post above looks like spam.

By: M. Menius

M. Menius — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:34:31 +0000

Much of the collective efforts of domainers were undermined by 2 or 3 Wikipedia administrators. Domaining and the domain name industry were comandeered and put down … by a couple of Wikipedia admins who abused their role & privileges.

Simply put, there is no legitimacy to Wikipedia when contributors & industry veterans can be blocked from the site by an angry teenager with an axe to grind.

Strangely ironic is when DomainNameWire.com and DNJournal.com are instantly eliminated by Wikipedia as credible news sources for our industry. Wikipedia want major media writers who have no first hand knowledge of domaining. When I point out that these “major media” writers are referencing DNJournal and DomainNameWire, Wikipedia delete any and all references to these tried & true publications with nary a word.

That’s called dishonesty. And that, among other flaws, is rampant at Wikipedia.

As far as domaining goes, it’s a fine word and a legal business activity. Someone has a problem with it, they need to check their conscience, i.e. their own domain related activities & choices.

The categorical condemnation is not really about “domaining”. Pick another word and they’ll dislike that. It’s what we do, regardless of the semantics, that is the object of envy & ignorance.

Domaining was pointed to cybersquatting. Steve identified this wrongful decision by Wikipedia, and thankfully the redirect is stopped … at least for now. What started out being our good faith effort based on principle actually actually wound up uncovering a gross lack of credibility at Wikipedia.

There is a future expose’ waiting to be written as Wikipedia has become the single greatest online source of misinformation maquerading as an encyclopedia.

By: David

David — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 14:34:14 +0000

I realize my comments are not too popular here but I still stand by what I said. Unfortunately, IMO the ‘D’ word has a real negative stereotype to it (much of it being undeserved or without merit).

By: SC

SC — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 19:41:18 +0000

David,
We are domainers and we have a legitimate business. We don’t need a new “brand”. And if attorneys and trademark interest could name everything we would be in a fine mess.

I know attorneys that don’t have political or personal agendas and they simply prosecute people who abuse intellectual property without trying to relabel them. IE: a crook accountant doesn’t mean all accountants are crooks.

After all, Nixion was still president even though he was a crook. He had a new brand; “President who was crook”.

Domainers who are cybersquatters are “Domainers who are cybersquatters”.

Boys, Comment all you want but this is my last entry in this crazy dialogue.

However, if we remane Domainers to Billionaires and give them what they need to be billionaires then I would go along with that.

By: David

David — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 15:35:14 +0000

You should always avoid using the word “domainer” to identify yourself since it has such a negative connotation to it in the view of the public and especially with attorneys and trademark interests.

But the question is it’s not easy to think of an an alternative word for your domain name business identification. Any ideas?