20i Domains

WHOIS details

Discussion in 'Nominet General Information' started by Admin, Apr 29, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jay Daley New Zealand

    Jay Daley Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2005
    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    12
    Yes we have stats on how many domains each tag holder registers and more. Of course I don't know who those tag holders are registering on behalf of without examining each registration.

    Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of time for domainers/drop-catchers. I just don't agree with this view that they are responsible for a large proportion of our registrations.
     
  2. Domain Forum

    Acorn Domains Elite Member

    Joined:
    1999
    Messages:
    Many
    Likes Received:
    Lots
    articles.co.uk
     
  3. Jay Daley New Zealand

    Jay Daley Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2005
    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    12
    Running a free mediation service as part of the DRS saves us money overall, which it would not do if it was not free as it would not be used. If we did not have it then we would be spending much more money dealing with upset people, handling the political complaints that would ensue and defending many more legal actions.
     
  4. texidriver United States

    texidriver Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2005
    Posts:
    488
    Likes Received:
    13
     
  5. texidriver United States

    texidriver Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2005
    Posts:
    488
    Likes Received:
    13
     
  6. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2006
  7. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
    http://www.nic.uk/disputes/drs/statistics/

    1232 cases (since inception) completed the informal mediation stage. That's about 0.025%.

    PS: In the long run spoon feeding teaches us nothing but the shape of the spoon. ;)

    Regards
    James Conaghan
    [PAB Member]
     
  8. olebean

    olebean Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2005
    Posts:
    2,216
    Likes Received:
    29
    Jay

    I can see your point, the only issue, if what you are suggesting is correct, then the likes of sedo etc would not have the amount of "readily availiable" registered domains...

    It obviously also depends on how you define domains/drop-catchers and large proportion...

    Personnally, I would find easy to believe that sedo are likely to hold between 200k and 400k .co.uk domains then there are those that are unlikely to be listed on sedo.....

    In reality, it is plusible to believe that of the 4 million suggested domains nominet manage, anywhere between 10 and 25% are likely to be held by domain property investors...

    Is that large proportion? Is that significant?

    Either way, it will raise a few eyebrows....
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2006
  9. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
    200k if they were all .uk domains would account for about 4% of the total. 400k about 8%. However, I did a general search for .uk domain names on sedo and got 5001 results. 5001 is about 0.1% of total .uk registrations to date.

    Personally; I think these figures are significant but not a large proportion (when compared to the 4,890,238 total .uk registrations).

    Regards
    James Conaghan
    [PAB Member]
     
  10. olebean

    olebean Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2005
    Posts:
    2,216
    Likes Received:
    29
    Jac

    I think you will find that is "Adult General", if you click business/ law this is what you get:



    FAQs


    Domain Catalog

    Domain Catalog / Business/Law



    :: Auctions (19,502) :: B2B (16,320) :: Banking (37,002)
    :: General (163,698) :: Industry (32,668) :: Insurance (16,794)
    :: Law (30,321) :: Marketing (35,383) :: Money (56,197)
    :: Real estate (53,099) :: Services (56,021) :: Shopping (47,396)
    :: Stocks (28,916) :: Trade (22,890)



    Lets face it, even with this small search we could easily be well above what I suggested was plusible......
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2006
  11. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
    Hi olebean

    I still don't understand what you are suggesting though. Even if we say it is 200k or 400k, this is still 8% (or less) of the total .uk registrations. Whilst any figure like this is obviously significant, are you suggesting domainers should be treated as a special case by Nominet?

    PS: I am simply trying to understand exactly what you suggesting in relation to these (possible) figures.

    Thanks
    James Conaghan
    [PAB Member]
     
  12. retired_member6

    retired_member6 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    5,605
    Likes Received:
    29
    There's still quite a few (loads) domains that are on sale that aren't even listed at sedo, well that's what I find when browsing.
     
  13. olebean

    olebean Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2005
    Posts:
    2,216
    Likes Received:
    29
    James

    It is interesting they way you appear not to acknowledge the existance of the plusibility and or reality of these snapshot figures...

    If nominet even acknowledge that 25% or above of domains registered are part of their considered undesirables, then it makes a nonsense of their rules.... It would make the undesirables a known underpinning contributor to their success (which I doubt they would want to acknowledge publically) and equally, they accept their registations...

    It would mean accepting publically that they can do nothing or are not willing to do anything about it, which in turn could bring question marks over the DRS system (would plusible deniability exisit if they do not action changes I am not sure it would)...

    What I am suggesting comes back to several things... Nominet needs an overhaul, however politically from what I have seen written in this form, it appears there are significant toothless tigers and or a lack of willingness to change the status quo...
     
  14. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
    Lee

    I totally accept that, but what I am trying to establish is; if people on AD think this should (or should not) give them special status with Nominet or any other Registry. If, as a proposition, we accept that domainers account for 10% of Nominet's registrations, do you think this should allow domainers (who are maybe tag holders of Nominet) special privileges over other registrants with just one or more registrations to their name?

    (10% was the estimate offered recently by Whois-Search)

    Regards
    James Conaghan
    [PAB Member]
     
  15. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
    Uh? :confused:

    I have already acknowledged the possibility of 200k or 400k - but snapshot figures are like exit polls; they are only indicative of what might happen; not what will.

    What do you mean by "considered undesirables"? Is that how you think Nominet views .uk registrations by domainers? Or have you seen Nominet say it somewhere?

    The thing about "plausibility" is that it works both ways. It is equally plausible that the domain names you refer to would just as easily be registered to "user registrants" because they would not be showing as already registered on a whois search.

    How does what you suggest bring question marks over the DRS system? The DRS system works on a set of policy and procedure rules that apply to everyone equally whether it be a domainer or a user registrant. And what do you mean by "not action changes"? For the record, Nominet actions all changes (in the whois) brought to its attention; and Tag Holders are bound by the 'Tag Holder Agreement' to action all changes brought to their attention. The registrant can even action their own changes by logging-on to Registrant's Online. :confused:

    But Nominet has changed the status quo. In the past 6/7 years it has reviewed and changed the Terms and Conditions, Rules of Registration, the way it interacts with registrants. Currently it is consulting on Raising Industry Standards, the Rules of registration, and is about to put out a consultation on the DRS. IMO, willingness to change the status quo seems reasonably evident.

    That said, from what I see, it seems obvious you just don't like Nominet or the current .uk registry system (and you have a right to your opinion) but it is probably fair to say that no matter what people like me say, you won't be happy until someone else is running the .uk registry. Is that the case?

    No offence intended but this kind of thinking is akin to people who voted Labour in 1997 because they got fed up with the Conservatives and then decided they didn't like Labour either. So why do you think anyone else running the .uk registry would be any better? Taking your plausability argument to its logical conclusion, you could end up with worse.

    Regards
    James Conaghan
    [PAB Member]
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2006
  16. retired_member6

    retired_member6 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    5,605
    Likes Received:
    29
    No, people should have equal rights as members not as to their wealth. Christ, could you imagine if Pipex or an individual company got control of Nominet? as they effectively have under the old rules - saw to the changes with one foul swoop. 123-reg have been murder all week, I wouldn't want them playing a huge part in nominet.

    It's never easy, I think as long as you allow for public access and response and continue to take things on board that way then it doesn't matter but like shares in a company, I'm a fan of the football club, pay for match tickets but I don't have shares, the only say I have is to sway mass opinion amongst fellow fans and contact the club, however I don't have a say on the board, the same with nominet, we buy their product but unless you're a member you can't vote.

    I don't thing there should be any weighting, you're a member that's it. Someone with 10 domains has as much voting power as that of a member with one domain.

    That's not to say their opinion shouldn't be heard, some of you are arguing about security issues on domain transfer and who should pay for it, do a consultation, as with anything there's a medium, I'm pretty sure it could be speeded up, be cost effective and easier to use for a domainer and still keep it secure for your normal bod on the street - you've got the money to do it and to make any changes needed.

    There is a small fact that domainers do make up a large percentage while being very few considering the larger holding split amongst many thousands of thousands, however they don't deserve more rights just a better business model and that's one thing people on AcornDomains can provide, their opinion and what would make things easier - and then you lot respond with a reason why it aint viable until it is.

    Ultimately I can't see domainers on here doing normal people who hold domains, any wrong, it's not in their best interests to increase fraud rate in any part of the holding is it? Christ, the government wants us to, in ten years time, give them our eyeballs and fingers and DNA and hold it all centrally, one thing I do know at the moment, nominet is going to be a lot safer with transfers than any government run ID card scheme.

    One of these days I will be paid to walk on to a board of a company and sort things out and bring fresh ideas - it's what I'm good at, trouble is I need to make my own money first to do that haha but I spend too much. :mrgreen: Special status has never sat well with me, no one on here is more important than me whether they have 1000 domains or 10000, they're just better at it or more loadedbut with that comes knowledge, I've learnt a lot myself.

    Nor am I better than someone who's just joined the forum today and only has one domain, that might be worth more than all mine put together. Also most on here are domainers, there's another section of that which do affiliate marketing and domaining, half an half, 90/10% then you've others looking in and many more categories, which is more important?

    A lot of words for just one paragraph, want to be a member and vote? be a member. Want to affect change? make sure nominet continue to take public views on board. Most on here just want an efficient secure business to ensure their business is efficient and secure, because as you rightly state we don't own domains, like land in this country, it's leased to us until we do great wrong.

    Although I haven't read nominet rules I know the Queen can get me Canadian domains if I ring her up haha :mrgreen: one of her many priviliges over there still.
     
  17. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
    Well that's a pretty balanced view Lee and spookily enough, I agree with much of it. Where you say "people should have equal rights as members" I am for all registrants (aka stakeholders) having equal rights with the proviso that it would be totally impractical to make millions of registrants members of Nominet. In any commerical arena, there has to be a structure, and Nominet members are part of that hierarchy. Some of them (hopefully many) believe in the mission statement, and in my view, the members (as a collective) should look after the interests of the wider stakeholder communities. Personally, I think people confuse membership with tag holding; IMO the two are not compatible. Being a member of Nominet is community oriented and should bind you to the mission statement that says you will act in the interests of the relevant stakeholder communities. Being a Tag Holder is profit-oriented and I don't hold much with the argument that because a Tag Holder has acquired (for argument's sake) 1 million domain names, they are somehow more representative of that community or more entitled than someone with 100, who looks after his/her registrants on a more personal basis.

    I am inclined to agree that we need to look at the domain name transfer process (+ the 30 quid fee) and how it can be speeded up without losing the security that is currently in place to protect the legal registrant and receiving party. What some people who argue for the 'click of a button .com way' have not mentioned is how open to abuse it is; especially in cases where a reseller gets the hump with the registrant and changes the registrant details; effectively hijacking their domain and holding them to ransom. And while I'm on the subject, I also don't like the current ICANN/Verisign 'transfer between Registrars' system where it is up to the losing registrar (or registrant) to object to the transfer or it is automatically allowed within 5 days. It seems clear that Top Level Registrars do not always warn registrants there may be a bogus transfer request in place. My advice? Make sure all your .COMs have a registrar lock on them; many don't.

    Opinions are great Lee, and any reasonable party to the Nominet equation should welcome them, but sometimes (on here) it feels like the christian arguing with the atheist that God exists. "No he doesn't" says the atheist. "Yes he does" says the christian. "Prove it" says the atheist. "I don't need to, I believe anyway" says the christian, "you find your own proof if it's proof you're after." ;)

    I have no problem agreeing with you on those points. :cool:

    Regards
    James Conaghan
    [PAB Member]
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2006
  18. bb99 United Kingdom

    bb99 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2005
    Posts:
    1,618
    Likes Received:
    38
    I am following this thread with great interest... Zooming out a bit, the one thing that I take away from it is this:

    People are all too quick to categorise "domainers" and/or "dropcatchers" and put them into a particular box and assume that they hold certain views, but it's clear to me from this thread that even the domainers (or dropcatchers) have very diverse views and differing opinions. And it's good that these discussions are taking place (even if I don't agree with some of what's been said, I think it's interesting to hear other people's views and the reasoning behind them).

    Err... You can resume battle now :rolleyes:
     
  19. olebean

    olebean Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2005
    Posts:
    2,216
    Likes Received:
    29
    James

    No offense taken however misguided ur opinion of what I suggested is

    I'll make it easy for u...

    The 200k to 400k from the snapshot amounted even by my simplest of math suggests the likely domain holding well above 400k, you may suggest thats a straw poll, I prefer to suggest there is more tangleble truth to it than that..

    You question the mentioning of undesirables... The so called undesirable tag is given by representatives of nomient to those that purchase domains for the purpose of PPC or other none "wholesome" activity... including in some quarters the existance of activity that does not wholly relate to singular TM but co-existance of unrelated TM with similar names....

    I can accept there are distinct differences between domainers and drop-catches, however a drop-catcher can operate in a similar ways to domainers... in that ther main purpose is not that of wholesome domain activity, but one of the resale/ppc etc market...

    In terms of the DRS system. If nominet where to acknowledge to ratio of theirs or their represenatives definition of undesirables, and the level of activity that would be require to redress the situation, nominet would not only loose face, by their own inaction. There surely would be question marks brought about then manner in which existing redress (and as some domains have already mentioned, leaning towards corporations), and what appears to be conflicting interests in the DRS system...

    The conflicting interests being the manner of redress without redressing the real issues....

    You suggest that nominet has changed, yes i agree it has, but has it kept pace with reality? I fear it is being dragged kicking and screaming, failing to acknowledge the depth of their reliance on the undesirables for fear of public embarassment.....

    The irony being they wrote the term undesirable, but rely on the undesirable without giving them due respect

    Do I like nominet? I am totally indifferent to them.. As i wrote earlier I am firmly in favour of the transfer fee, I am firmly in favour of a system that does away with the leasing system and more in favour of a system of ownership with annual payment to nominet, I am firmly in favour of nominet stopping the open release of generic domains and putting the best on open auction, I am firmly in favour of the government keeping hold of domains when a business/ individual goes bust, I am firmly in favour of the government being pushed on domaining and the directors of nominet receiving "going rate renumerations"

    To be truthful as much of us domainers already know, the free forall has go, its time to move the goal posts and manipulate wealth in other ways, that does mean just me, that means nominet (of which I believe they should move into more markets) and every other domainer...... To me the only plausible way is to ensure that domain resales pass at the highest possible value and to ensure stability of ownership

    Finally, do I think members should have to agree to the mission statement. My gawd no! Thats like Chairman Moa insisting that all chinese be communists or he will get rid of you.... As with much of what I have seen, from those individuals close to nominet, heaven help if you have an opinion that isnt inline with nominet policy.....
     
  20. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
    Well; I know the feeling of being categorised, so I'm glad you mentioned how quick people are to categorise, because it cuts both ways; eg: olebean called me a Nominet brown nose. Water and duck's back apply. ;)

    I agree; it is good that these discussions are taking place and there have been some very diverse views. Like I said before; there is IMO a lot of misinformation about, and I would like to help clarify the issues that come up. That's why I keep suggesting we stick to facts as opposed to conjecture.

    I don't expect everyone to agree with me, but it would be nice if they would extend the same courtesy to other people's viewpoints as they seem to demand for their own. That's just plain old-fashioned consideration (to me anyway) and it's a two-way street. :cool:

    :p

    Regards
    James Conaghan
    [PAB Member]
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2006
  21. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
    Then I have to say you are arguing semantics because there can be no tangible and no truth without fact. That said, I have already accepted the possibility of 400k so I don't know why we're still arguing this particular point. :cool:

    As an historic fact, "domaining" was not the prolific industry it now is when Nominet first introduced the DRS and the issues the DRS was set up to address are the same today as they were then; eg: trademark infringement, bad faith or abusive registrations. The DRS did not specifically target domainers nor does it now, so the suggestion that the DRS is somehow biased against one particular stakeholder group or that it doesn't redress the "real issues" seems to lack objectivity; especially when the whole purpose of the DRS was to be just that; objective.

    However, I am never going to convince you on this point so I will simply suggest we wait and see what the DRS Review and consultation shows us. At least then we can discuss the new proposals and make suggestions for improving the system from there.

    Reality is at best, highly subjective, and even Governments are dragged kicking and screaming at times, but that's what democratic debate is all about; finding consensus. The most important part of consensus is finding people who will actually do what the people want (and I mean the majority). Everybody wants what they want but nobody likes compromise; such is the human frailty. With so many diverse viewpoints, it is never an easy task getting consensus, but I personally believe in consensus as a democratic principle. That sometimes means foregoing my own values and bowing to the majority view; that's democracy.

    I still do not know where you get the term "undesirable" that you keep quoting. Can you please point me to where Nominet wrote this?

    As I have said previously, this is actually a matter of legal definition. If it was indeed "law" that a domain name was recognised as property, then Nominet would be obliged to comply with the Law but the Law is a matter for Governments in the first instance and the Courts in the second.

    When you say you are "firmly in favour of the government being pushed on domaining", do you mean you would like the government to specifically condone domaining as a business model?

    For the sake of clarity (of my thinking); the mission statement simply says Nominet will act in "the interests of the relevant stakeholder communities" though Nominet may well change this bit to read: "responding to the needs of our stakeholders". However, my point in suggesting members should abide by this concept is strictly community oriented. If the Registry you sign up to as a member is bound by its own mission statement to act in the interests of (or respond to the needs of) the stakeholder, then it seems logical to me Mr Spock, that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few... with apologies to all Trekkies out there! :twisted:

    Not like you to be cynical olebean :rolleyes: but for what it's worth, I have many opinions that are not "inline" with Nominet (or the board's) thinking and I raise controversial issues all the time; but there is no hint of sanction or censure; quite the opposite. Nominet is one of the few organisations I have been involved with who are prepared to listen even when they don't like what they hear. They have a right not to like it, just as we have the same right; but that's democracy; and isn't it grand? ;)

    Regards
    James Conaghan
    [PAB Member]
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2006
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.