Removed catching thread.

PoshTiger · Oct 23, 2014

Ok, please discuss it here if need be WITHOUT making accusations about other members and naming them.

I had a request to remove the thread because it called into question the integrity of another member which isn't acceptable IMO.

I know I'm gonna take some flack for it but I think I was correct to do so.

PoshTiger · Oct 23, 2014

Lol, I do - I have my own script.

AssetDomains · Oct 23, 2014

So yet another thread closed I'm not sure why we can't have an adult discussion here why not just remove the offending post.

@invincible

In answer to your question there I'm on Denys domaincatch system. He was fully open when I signed up that it doesn't use the same script he does personally.
So like others on here don't get a sniff at the real great names that have dropped recently.

PoshTiger · Oct 23, 2014

Nope, all my own work. I was a little dissappointed I wasn't named and shamed tbh as I take quite a lot of public bookings.

PoshTiger · Oct 23, 2014

Tony Wight also uses my system yes, but it's a totally separate isolated system. It has to be. You OK with me now? Any more questions?

ian · Oct 23, 2014

I'm not sure you'll get those kind of answers David, and I'm not surprised, no one would give away guarded secrets on how they have success.

Would like to see the original thread though, didn't get time to read it all or any responses to my questions.

DaveP · Oct 23, 2014

No posts in that thread were accusatory at all and I don't agree with it being removed.

PoshTiger · Oct 23, 2014

I'm pretty sure most catchers called nominet when catcher *1 dominated and were told what I was told. Don't come here and complain just because someone else's script is better than yours.

We've been through all this before btw, nothing's changed apart from the players.

PoshTiger · Oct 23, 2014

invincible said:
What about my second?

If course not, it would require both members to be complicit in breaking the rules and like most others, I've far too much to lose than gain.

ChrisMM · Oct 23, 2014

I don't see what the big fuss is all about. If these practices aren't illegal then it's all fair game surely?

The catchers might operate in the grey, but find me a successful business that doesn't (or hasn't in the past).

Saying it's 'not fair' or down to greed is laughable. I liken it to website owners moaning about the sites ranking above them.

PoshTiger · Oct 23, 2014

ChrisMM said:
I don't see what the big fuss is all about. If these practices aren't illegal then it's all fair game surely?

The catchers might operate in the grey, but find me a successful business that doesn't (or hasn't in the past).

Saying it's 'not fair' or down to greed is laughable. I liken it to website owners moaning about the sites ranking above them.

Correct

ian · Oct 23, 2014

invincible said:
In respect of utilising multiple DAC and EPP allowances in concert, it is counter to the Nominet anti avoidance rules (or whatever they're called nowadays). It isn't illegal in law though.

But where is the proof that has led to all these accusations? If you have none, then these pointed questions are a little unethical; if you do have proof, then submit to Nominet to ensure fairness is once again the order of the day. Those with nothing to hide would then in theory reap the rewards.

AssetDomains · Oct 23, 2014

invincible said:
People only complain about these kind of threads when they have something to hide in my opinion. There was plenty of information in the the thread that many catchers might not want published and unfortunately the moderator who removed it cannot hide the fact that he has a self interest in drop catching.

I don't drop catch, however I am happy to email Nominet with data provided and they will investigate accusations of members working in concert. That should put an end to complaints. Should I start by asking them to look at sp***g.co.uk (my asterisks), since that domain was highlighted previously? Any others?

I don't believe either person are doing anything dodgy in terms of multiple allowances they have simply identified a bug in the system.
You would probably need 50+ tags to go on the run one person did earlier this year and that would only be poling the maximum for 7 hours a day both these guys get to the name whenever it drops in the 24 hours which means there would be a massive 200ms between there poll's of the dac. It would take a lot of tags to plug that gap I don't believe these hot streaks have anything to do with multiple tags.

PoshTiger · Oct 23, 2014

AssetDomains said:
I don't believe either # or # are doing anything dodgy in terms of multiple allowances they have simply identified a bug in the system.
You would probably need 50+ tags to go on the run did earlier this year and that would only be poling the maximum for 7 hours a day both these guys get to the name whenever it drops in the 24 hours which means there would be a massive 200ms between there poll's of the dac. It would take a lot of tags to plug that gap I don't believe these hot streaks have anything to do with multiple tags.

Gah, please edit out the names.

PoshTiger · Oct 23, 2014

invincible said:
Fine. Your opinion. Who hosts yours?

Now you're being silly.

So 4 tags will cover the day on maximum polling (of the DAC). Further tags would still give more allowance and more polling in the gaps. The needle on my obfuscation detection meter is going haywire.

Are you definitely not a customer of either D****n or D***s?

He's right regarding the maths dude.

AssetDomains · Oct 23, 2014

PoshTiger said:
Gah, please edit out the names.

Done but I wasn't accusing them of doing anything bad in fact the exact opposite

PoshTiger · Oct 23, 2014

AssetDomains said:
Done but I wasn't accusing them of doing anything bad in fact the exact opposite

Thanks, if we can just keep the names out, that'd be great.

grantw · Oct 23, 2014

It doesn't take long for the witch hunt to start these days!

I'm as sure as I can be that this has nothing to do with multiple TAGs/allowances.

Grant

ian · Oct 23, 2014

invincible said:
Nobody can realistically argue that having more than a single DAC allowance isn't a significant advantage in respect of total 24 hour DAC coverage. Does anyone wish to try to argue this?

If you have one allowance you can only cover a portion of the day on the fastest setting. Does anyone wish to try to argue this?

If you have four DAC allowances you can cover the entire 24 hour period on the fastest setting. Does anyone wish to try to argue this?

Nope, but it still doesn't prove that is what others are doing, just because a thread was removed.

Not really any different than a catcher asking another catcher to help them pick up a domain, apart from possibly not coordinating query times.

Surely if this was happening but the same EPP used, Nominet could tell quite easily?

Still think, even with more tags, there would still be gaps for others, so I'm of the mindset that this is down to solid script and the best (most expensive?) server setup.

Tony - still names mentioned in quotes, by you and another.

AssetDomains · Oct 23, 2014

invincible said:
Fine. Your opinion. Who hosts yours?

Now you're being silly.

So 4 tags will cover the day on maximum polling (of the DAC). Further tags would still give more allowance and more polling in the gaps. The needle on my obfuscation detection meter is going haywire.

Are you definitely not a customer of either D****n or D***s?

I stated earlier I'm on domaincatch. but as both these people can catch any time in the 24 hours they must be polling 200ms apart given that any decent script would take less than a millisecond to talk to nominet you would need 200 working in perfect harmony just to make sure you had every millisecond covered between poll's even then you need a bit of luck. I don't know how they do it but it seems clear its not just a case of multiple accounts