Comments on: Nelson Brady Comes Clean in Response to SnapNames Lawsuit

By: Landon White

Landon White — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 10:18:06 +0000

@ stewart

Of course Andrew is not an Investigative reporter or a Policeman or in a position to place judgment he simply asked that we all refer from RANTING ON THIS HOT SUBJECT!
your abusive remarks were uncalled for.

If you are so upset over Nelson Brady i suggest you contact the Washington Attorney Generals office (Brady Home State) as there is much confirmed evidence that he is guilty of International/National Wire Fraud
a Federal crime …

It is indeed remarkable that much effort had been made not to prosecute him, this CLEARLY indicates suspicion that others
may have been involved in said criminal activities.

By: stewart

stewart — Sat, 29 May 2010 11:45:06 +0000

Andrew, you need to look at the definition of bias, you are biased when you caption Brady as coming clean…perhaps Brayd issued a mia culpa …Brady has been caught red handed he has no defense for anything he has done and he knows it, you in the other hand Andrew are a hack and not much else, your gushing interviews with the CEO of oversee were herdly hard hittng and dynamic, you had a chance to question him on the issue and you demured no doubt because you made a deal that if he were to be interviewed you would ask nothing about the Halvarez matter.
Andrew you do a good job reporting the the domain related functions but you are by no means an investigative reporter, your allegience is clear, to the industry.
Bray is guilty of eveything he is accused of doing, snapnames was remiss in instituting the checks and balances of any other corporation and oversee is guilty of collusion for keeping this in house till they got every thing they wanted, from the federal judge by down writing the dollars here then setting a 30 million dollar value to their suit instead, ad of course as usual?
You see no hypocracy here…ergo you ar like wise a hypocrit.

By: Andrew Allemann

Andrew Allemann — Fri, 28 May 2010 15:03:52 +0000

“Andrew post the header ‘comes clean’ i have to come to the conclusion Andrew is a sympathetic figure with a personal bias for the bad actors here.”

Stewart, you need to look up the definition of “come clean” – to confess

By: Acro

Acro — Thu, 27 May 2010 16:43:17 +0000

I propose that we start the Hank Alvarez fund. The guy is in need. Let’s do the Christian thing and forgive his sinful acts. Or something like that.

By: Bob

Bob — Thu, 27 May 2010 14:51:53 +0000

The whole thing is just sad but I don’t believe it this is the real truth either. This is the 3rd or 4th “excuse” I’ve heard. Perhaps there are some half truths in there structured to help fight the lawsuit in the best way possible. But if he had done this to get more names he’d have better names. I just don’t want to think about it anymore, it’s just so damn sad. The truth is probably that he did it because it gave him a twisted sense of power and control over others.. an overseer type of rush that worked for him, and if it got company earnings up and elevated Snapnames all the better. He wanted his team to win at all cost, and he would have gotten away with it, along with others who did the exact same thing at different auction houses, if not for some whistleblower. My only regret is that other malfeasance at otheer auction houses never came to the surface in the spectacular way this did.

By: stewart

stewart — Thu, 27 May 2010 14:26:40 +0000

Andrew post the header ‘comes clean’ i have to come to the conclusion Andrew is a sympathetic figure with a personal bias for the bad actors here.
Nelson Brady has not come clean, he is simply putting issues of mitgation and extenuation ahead of the facts of the case against him.
His pleas under the 14th amendment are particularly notable, when one stops to consider the language

‘ nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; ‘

as Mr Brady set about to deprive others of their property?

Mr Brady has no defense, he set about to launch ths deception, he maintained it, and when caught he sought to save his job, and he and the com0pany made a deal among themselves at everyone else disadvantage, those who fell victim in all the possible ways made no deal to not seek redress.

The defense of ‘I dont have medical security so I derived a way to obtain it’ really does speak to the state of health care where a company simply will not afford health care even for its management, and how far an individual will go to get health care, or and escalde, a Rolex, or a condo in the islands.

By: chandan

chandan — Thu, 27 May 2010 14:16:20 +0000

seems preepared statements