20i Domains

Nominet announces new policy consultation for expiring .UK domains

Discussion in 'Nominet General Information' started by Acorn Newsbot, Jul 16, 2020.

  1. Derek Portugal

    Derek Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2020
    Posts:
    73
    Likes Received:
    1
    How many will it be? Can we have a specific number for talking sake please.

    Its either going to be worth me cheating, or its not going to be worth any legitimate people entering at all. This method is entirely bust before it even starts.
     
  2. Domain Forum

    Acorn Domains Elite Member

    Joined:
    1999
    Messages:
    Many
    Likes Received:
    Lots
    articles.co.uk
     
  3. Derek Portugal

    Derek Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2020
    Posts:
    73
    Likes Received:
    1
    If anyone thinks Helptobuy is too much of an outlying example lets use Bars.co.uk. Currently on auction at £2,050.
     
  4. dee

    dee Well-Known Member Acorn Supporter

    Joined:
    May 2013
    Posts:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    307
    I thought the whole point was to stop cheating from Nominets standpoint ? At least with a well run lottery at one price per entry it takes any collusion or technical advantage out of it ?

    I disagree on the legitimate people angle. It'll just end up with people watching bids the same as ebay except you cant snipe...only buy tickets.

    EDIT. The number of people will depend on the domain and who wants it. However if if lets say pizza.co.uk drops (lol...yeah right) then obviously its going to get a lot more interest than croydenpizza.co.uk . But if your in croyden and own a pizza shop then may be worth 2 or three tickets. Difference is..... i could potentially get pizza.co.uk for. tenner
     
  5. Derek Portugal

    Derek Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2020
    Posts:
    73
    Likes Received:
    1
    If you want a lottery system then yes, ending cheating needs to be the main aim or the entire system fails.

    Are you going to legitimately allow me to buy 99 tickets while you buy one?

    If yes then we may as well end the pretence of a lottery, call it an auction and let me bid 99 x lottery ticket price.
     
  6. dee

    dee Well-Known Member Acorn Supporter

    Joined:
    May 2013
    Posts:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    307
    But its not an auction.... its a raffle/lottery. It means im still in with a chance. I will legitimately allow you to buy 99 tickets and ill buy one as that my budget. At least i still have a chance, and you have to balance your potential loss with banging 990 quid and i still get it for a tenner

    EDIT. I'll also say... i 100% dont want it to change at all as i currently make some money. I'm bottom rung in terms of catching and use a rented catch script, but im learning what to go for and what actually sells. There are guys here that are VERY good at what they do and make amazing money im sure. Fair game to them.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2020
  7. Derek Portugal

    Derek Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2020
    Posts:
    73
    Likes Received:
    1
    But I will play the odds and financially outmuscle you when it makes sense. When it doesn't, I won't.

    I think you'd be better letting me buy the domain for 99x entry fee and you go to your local newsagent with your 1x fee and buy a scratch card.

    What you're proposing is effectively gambling, not investing and not real business. There is no chance whatsoever of Nominet doing this. For a start they legally can't, it breaches gambling laws.
     
  8. dee

    dee Well-Known Member Acorn Supporter

    Joined:
    May 2013
    Posts:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    307
    Possibly, and i did mention the gambling angle early on ( as someone else had pointed it out)

    You can potentially try and bully me out, but can you do that with every decent domain ? It would only take a couple where you get the 'one in a thousand' at a tenner and your screwed. I think it might make people actually think about what they want as opposed to sitting on hundreds of domains (which im guilty of)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Derek Portugal

    Derek Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2020
    Posts:
    73
    Likes Received:
    1
    I think I could bully you out financially yes, based on estimates of how many would enter / what my chances of winning would be.

    Either way its a moot point because you can't charge an entry fee for a £5000+ domain and run it as a raffle.

    The only way you could run a raffle would be for it to be entirely free to enter. And then I will enter 100's or 1000's of times and you'll be bullied more than a red headed step child.
     
  10. othellotech United Kingdom

    othellotech Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2009
    Posts:
    51
    Likes Received:
    6
    I think they just added more cars, diamond encrusted everything and are printing themselves unlimited ride-again tickets, so probably not even slowing down let alone getting derailled ;)

    And this is why board members really should be attending member-y things like the key partners meetings/registrar days - then they'd know more about the presentation-of and responses-relating-to some of the promotions and how many were planning to use them :p

    This was *not* an unknown/unexpected outcome of the promo.
    This was "outside of the spirit" if not necessarily the exact wording (the phrase "allowing you to offer it for free to the registrant" was very specifically talked about), but as we didn't sign up for it I did not go through what got published

    In fact a question was asked about the voting rights impact relating to something you dont _pay_ for - I was the one who asked it !

    So it was very much "expected" by many even if, as you claim, it came as a shock to some

    Then of course once it became "common knowledge" of how it was getting how much of a cascade of "they've done it so we have to" came into effect ?

    And from my understanding of talking to some larger members, more than 1 followed up with "can you run it again/a special for us so we can do it" occurred !

    Afterall, suddenly adding millions of DuM was going to play havoc with the relative %age representation at the voting stages

    And whilst the composition of the board may not have had a GD staff member at the table (and for absolute clarity, I am NOT suggesting the promo involved anything of impropriety ) in years past there had been an amount of "how would it affect X" influence over policy due to the size of 123-reg, "Oli-gate" wasn't exactly forgotten and Mr Hope was involved in the "selling of the promo" to registrars - so you should be able to understand why people may have assumed something underhand was going on.

    That is exactly what Directors in the real-world actually spend time doing
    - I don't anticipate a submarine falling from the sky into my office coffee machine, but it's damn well been planned around :)
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  11. Siusaidh

    Siusaidh Retired Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2019
    Posts:
    862
    Likes Received:
    302
    That comment is total win, Rob.

    And even if they did not foresee it happening in October 2017 with Namesco and 123-Reg (which I find totally unbelievable with regard to the Executive), when they re-ran the promo in June 2019, that was completely "eyes open" - they'd seen what had happened in October 2017, and they didn't think it would happen again in June 2019?! That's complete nonsense.

    This was blatant facilitation of mass-registrations that they knew were almost certainly going to happen.

    When the agreed and promised 5 years were up, and the unclaimed .uk domains became available, 2,800,000 domains were not released because they'd been mass-registered without the request of the registrants themselves - totally contrary in my view to several RRA clauses (specifically Clause 3.2 and 3.2.3, and also 3.2.6, 2.8 and 2.8.1).

    What part of "You must not request a transaction if the Registrant you identify to us in the transaction has not instructed or requested you to act on its behalf" do they not understand?

    They were registering domains that the original registrants just didn't want and hadn't requested. By the end of September 2020 .uk will have haemorrhaged 2,300,000 domains from .uk's peak. The policy of 'laissez-faire' by Nominet (to boost registrations and just let those companies police themselves) brought disrepute but achieved almost nothing.

    I cannot escape the personal view that what occurred here was really poor judgment. The free registrations helped these large companies as they went ahead with the circumvention of RRA rules, and then the Executive sat back and watched.

    The registration figures tell their own story:

    For 14 months prior to the first promotion, .uk registrations were flat-lining in the 600,000s.

    Then suddenly, October 2017: they shot up to 2,119,904 registrations in a matter of weeks.

    Then more or less a plateau for 20 months at that level in the lower 2 millions (the vast majority mass-registered by Namesco and 123Reg).

    Then suddenly, June 2019: it shot up to 3,606,697 registrations.

    About 2,800,000 mass-registered domains were unavailable in the agreed release at the end of the 5 years which was a clear undertaking to the public. It was the agreed process, which Namesco, 123Reg, Fasthosts and 1&1 effectively hijacked.

    Only about 80,000 names were actually registered in the ROR and its immediate aftermath.

    I think this demonstrates the scale of the disruption of process, both of the 5-year undertaking, and of a fair system of voting rights. I do not believe the Executive was taken by surprise in October 2017. I feel sure neither the Executive nor the Board could expect Fasthosts/1&1 not to score through the open goal in the repeated promotion in June 2019. They'd seen what happened before. They could not be 'taken by surprise' the second time. The free registrations facilitated the name grab.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2020
  12. Siusaidh

    Siusaidh Retired Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2019
    Posts:
    862
    Likes Received:
    302
    Some people think I'm obsessed with a single issue. I'm not. I'm obsessed with fair process. My concern with this episode of the mass-registrations is that I think it demonstrates the way 'arrangements' between Registries and really large Registrars can be damaging to the public perception of due process. I am not being negative in this. I want Nominet to flourish. But the UK namespace is not the private fiefdom of a few big tech companies. It is UK national infrastructure. It is vital it is run with best standards that can be trusted. If these large registrars can hijack agreed process, and do their own thing (and the Executive basically said it wasn't Nominet's business - even when the RRA clauses were circumvented - it was up to the big companies to police themselves)... if the largest registrars can dominate policy outcomes to this extent, then that is very concerning... not only in the past but for the future as well.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Siusaidh

    Siusaidh Retired Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2019
    Posts:
    862
    Likes Received:
    302
    One further point for reflection:

    If clear rules that apply to everyone can be circumvented and not enforced when large Registrars are left to make their own judgments (for example setting aside the *rule* that the registrants must themselves request domains registered in their own names)... and if the extreme actions of large Registrars can be allowed to disrupt agreed processes set out for everyone else (the release of all unwanted .uk domains after 5 years)...

    What kind of culture and message does that send out to other parties who try to circumvent Nominet rules and AUP, and hope the rules won't be enforced on them either?

    If the biggest business partners can circumvent the agreed rules, in search of profit... and their actions go unchallenged... with Nominet saying "it's up to them"...

    Why are we surprised if others, also seeking profit, bypass agreed rules too?

    Example has to start with how the commercially rich and powerful are allowed to behave, and required to adhere to set down rules.
     
  14. Edwin

    Edwin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    9,954
    Likes Received:
    596
    If that's the case, then - and I say this with genuine respect - why in the world are you putting yourself forward as a non-executive director candidate?

    Going by their past behaviour, there is a veritable Everest of evidence to demonstrate that Nominet has very little regard for fair process. You will get nowhere trying to fight them. Nobody else ever has, despite many putting in immense effort over many, many years. It's like trying to wrestle blancmange.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  15. GLYMPSE

    GLYMPSE Active Member Acorn Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 2010
    Posts:
    70
    Likes Received:
    16
    Brit registry is the cash cow that keeps on giving

    UK internet registry operator Nominet has decided to reform the way in which expired .uk domains are released and, to no one's surprise, has decided that the best solution is one that will result in it receiving millions of pounds in profit.

    Last week, the organisation published what it says is a "consultation" on the process of making expired domains available, though industry insiders soon discovered that a decision had already been made.

    Rather than let domains expire and be picked up by registered Nominet members who then market and sell the domains to you and me - a vital revenue source for many of those members - Nominet has decided it should run an auction process where the highest bidder wins and the registry keeps all the money.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2020
  16. Murray

    Murray Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2012
    Posts:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    398
  17. diablo

    diablo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2005
    Posts:
    1,943
    Likes Received:
    112
    "The purpose appears to be to allow Nominet's executives to play at being businesspeople without taking any of the commercial risks, because the UK registry – which is an effective monopoly – provides a massive financial cushion."
     
    • Winner Winner x 5
  18. philiporchard United Kingdom

    philiporchard Well-Known Member Acorn Supporter

    Joined:
    May 2007
    Posts:
    1,960
    Likes Received:
    125
    I've only just jumped to the last page on this thread, but I was interest to know what the comment about bars.co.uk was about?

    Was it the fact it stared at £1,100? or just the fact it is over £2k?
     
  19. Derek Portugal

    Derek Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2020
    Posts:
    73
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'm just using the most recent 4 figure drop I can find.

    If people think they can come up with a way to stop cheating in some sort of lottery draw then lets see how we do it with this example.

    Gambling laws prevent you charging a fee to enter that you won't get back.

    So the only other option would be a lottery draw thats free to enter, with the winner paying some sort of registration fee. If I know the domain can be flipped for £2000+ why wouldn't I enter with 100's of accounts?
     
  20. diablo

    diablo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2005
    Posts:
    1,943
    Likes Received:
    112
    [QUOTE="Derek, post: 634488, member: 17378"

    Gambling laws prevent you charging a fee to enter that you won't get back.

    [/QUOTE]

    No they don't. The Gambling Act 2005 allows lotteries in which persons are required to pay to participate. You just need to have the appropriate licence.

    I'm not advocating for a lottery, just correcting your error.

    https://fnf.org.uk/phocadownload/jo...uments-gambling-commission-guidance-notes.pdf
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2020
  21. Systreg

    Systreg Well-Known Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2008
    Posts:
    7,531
    Likes Received:
    265
    • Like Like x 5