Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username:	antipodes
Date/Time:	Fri, October 26, 2001 at 10:30 PM GMT
Browser:	Netscape Communicator V4.74 using Windows 98
Subject:	kindred spirits - I am in agreement with above posters - but
Message:
there are questions which remain. What of Afilias Ltd. which ran the scam of the .info launch - knowingly taking money from Landrush preregistrants while taking preregistration money from fraudulent Sunrise applicants for the same names? At the moment it looks as though the only stake holders paying are the Landrushers.  Who is going to make the Afilias principles behind the scam pay? What of the 5,000 top generics fraudulently registered in Sunrise which must have received the most attention and monetary investment of the Landrushers? (I am leaving out Plankenstein's 5,000) It's looking like Afilias and its approved registrars have the Landrusher's money, the fraudulent Sunriser's money, and will turn around and market and sell preregistrations all over again for these premium names.  Just can't wait Roland for your next scam!!  I am sure you will have the general public fooled - but those of us with month's of experience of Afilias's scams will see through your spin. Why can't the original Landrushers have standing at Landrush II?

Message Thread:

• Realistic expectations and a .INFO valuation model — challenge, October 26 @ 3:37 PM (2/29)
• .INFO — S. Hudgens, October 26 @ 5:28 PM (0/0)
• Quite Right — richard_henderson, October 26 @ 5:14 PM (2/27)
• .info is a boon...... — onmove, October 26 @ 7:53 PM (3/7)
• You just described the use of every TLD on the planet .... — cgrady, October 26 @ 10:36 PM (0/0)
• kindred spirits - I am in agreement with above posters - but — antipodes, October 26 @ 10:30 PM (1/1)
• I have not forgotten about the appalling arse they made on purpose — spot, October 26 @ 10:56 PM (0/0)
• I agree! — cambler, October 26 @ 8:01 PM (1/3)
• How many more TLDs would you like to see added to the root? As many as new.net are pushing for? — spot, October 26 @ 10:59 PM (1/2)
• How many? — cambler, October 27 @ 1:16 AM (1/1)
• Yes, I agree with the 1 apiece recommendation, and that is my main grumble with new.net — spot, October 27 @ 3:02 AM (0/0)
• The argument for fairness — challenge, October 26 @ 6:23 PM (1/18)
• Fairness — S. Hudgens, October 26 @ 7:03 PM (1/17)
• Logic — challenge, October 26 @ 8:08 PM (1/16)
• Overlap — S. Hudgens, October 26 @ 8:58 PM (2/15)
• I Agree! NO OVERLAP! — Timberstone, October 27 @ 5:33 AM (0/0)
• Overlap — cambler, October 26 @ 9:10 PM (1/13)
• Yes. — S. Hudgens, October 26 @ 9:36 PM (1/12)
• Overlap — challenge, October 26 @ 11:28 PM (2/11)
• Overlap is irrelevant — cgrady, October 27 @ 5:19 PM (0/0)
• Banging heads — cambler, October 27 @ 1:20 AM (2/9)
• urr... — InternetAdvocate, October 28 @ 10:01 PM (1/1)
• Shows you how long ago I left LA! — cambler, October 29 @ 4:15 AM (0/0)
• Wrong again — challenge, October 27 @ 4:29 PM (3/6)
• Don't belong? — cambler, October 27 @ 6:08 PM (1/1)
• TLDs selected in November 2000 — Jim Fleming, October 27 @ 6:20 PM (0/0)
• No overlap = monopoly — cgrady, October 27 @ 5:46 PM (1/2)
• Monopolistic... — InternetAdvocate, October 28 @ 10:04 PM (1/1)
• You're right — cambler, October 29 @ 4:17 AM (0/0)
• Where should .WEB people be ? — Jim Fleming, October 27 @ 5:32 PM (0/0)

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy