That makes logical sense to me, so I’m withdrawing my “cowardly” remarks about the site owners, and if Dub-A is happy with the UWOS guys, I’m good with that.

I wish them success, and Dub-A continued credit for his work.

In most of my posts, by now, you should recognize a touch of whimsy. I’m just pointing out a simple fact, which easily could change in the next few weeks when the site’s owner includes articles from his own research, or a wide range of other sources. I find it a little cowardly, tho, that the site owner is remaining anonymous. I could be wrong on this, maybe the owner has a reason. I’ll take the lambasting if I am. Plus, I’m fiercely loyal to my friends, online and off. Dub-A hates it, but I consider him a friend.

I’m not trying to be harsh, but unfortunately a few people perceive my writing as acerbic. However, my comments should be taken with a handful of salt. You’ll know it when I’m “harsh” by my standards, i.e.– I write something and don’t post it. heh

I have a folder of these goodies of raw brutal truth, and for some reason, the more comments I don’t post that I put into this folder, the more that folder icon gets these little “flames” popping up from it. Weird.

I’m just trying to give Dub-A the credit that is really his, based on his hard work, and Dub-A works hard.

Even tho I’m sure you’re in Europe, I want to wish you and everyone a Happy ThanksGiving day, to count your blessings and give thanks, be with family and friends today and enjoy those “little” things with your loved ones that count for what joy is really about.

cheers

Stephen

Could it be that Andrew and Michael spot many of UDRP mistakes?
(I don’t know, Probably not.)

Both of them do an excellent job of reporting UDRP errors.
I don’t know when they find the time to read the cases plus do everyday business.

You are correct, the website owner should have more than 2 sources. Since, the site is up, maybe they will dig deeper plus receive tips from some of the IP lawyers.
The domain is only 28 days old.

Disclaimer – I don’t know who the owner of the site is in question.

Calling Out the Worst UDRP Decisions of All Time http://ff.im/-c2IjB

Why didn’t the owner of the site just name it “DNW’s UDRP WALL OF SHAME”?? The content is clearly based on your articles (9 out of 10 UDRP examples on the “Wall of Shame” give backlink credit to DNW.)

It’s a real “shame” that this website’s domain is listed under a privacy proxy.

It doesn’t seem fair that the majority of content for a “good idea” website is based on the compilation of content from your site. How do you “really” feel about this, even with the backlinks? Just curious

Dub-A, you’re such a gentleman. You state “Many of the cases on UDRP Wall of Shame cite articles on Domain Name Wire, but there are several other resources used as well.” Ummm, the only other source is Em-Bee’s TheDomains.com.

I’m looking at this site from the viewpoint of “genuine” source and credit. So, I’m stepping up to be the Sword of Truth here, and being loyal to the real source of the content… Dub-A and DNW. Credit might be given to you, but so what? I could buy some TM domains and sell products by the TM owners, giving them backlinks. Then we’d be back to those UDRP examples!

“Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.”