Comments on: Arrington: Apologies Shouldn’t be Conditional

By: Andrew Allemann

Andrew Allemann — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 14:36:02 +0000

Matt, what am I wrong about this time?

By: Matt

Matt — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 05:36:01 +0000

Andrew, can I ask you a question? Why are you always wrong? We must be two completely different people or something.

By: Unasi

Unasi — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 03:55:26 +0000

I don’t mind the waiver but I mind those Rust consulting morons are able to work only via snailmail – WTF ? In 2009 they are asking paper which is no proof instead of just login into affected account and confirm there which is 100% proof it was done by the account owner. Rust consulting = another corporate morons.

By: Andrew Allemann

Andrew Allemann — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:13:56 +0000

acro - the data is now available back to 2004.

By: Andrew Allemann

Andrew Allemann — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:08:42 +0000

Acro – they’re working on it, according to the forum post.

By: Acro

Acro — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:09:12 +0000

I started the campaign on forums and through my blog for Oversee/Snapnames to re-instate the auction history. It seems that under the uproar caused by this “glitch” they are working on it. Hopefully all data will be there, vs. part of it. To fully trust Oversee – buyer of Snapnames – one needs to see 101% transparency from them.

By: Rob Sequin

Rob Sequin — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:00:27 +0000

Since anyone who bought a domain from Brady (assuming someone must have bought one), they would know that the domain they were buying was in a drop AND was owned by Brady.

Hmmm.

Now we’re talking conspiracy.

You can’t tell me that no one ever bought a domain from Brady.