|
Unfuckingbelievable, by bazzj04 on Jun 30, 2009 15:22:25 GMT 1, Well we all intitltled to a break and i work through my lunch and have my breaks mini breaks through the day, Sure i spoke to you earlier actually on the help line did you call in ?.
Well we all intitltled to a break and i work through my lunch and have my breaks mini breaks through the day, Sure i spoke to you earlier actually on the help line did you call in ?.
|
|
ulysee
New Member
Posts โข 11
Likes โข 0
June 2009
|
Unfuckingbelievable, by ulysee on Jul 2, 2009 13:27:05 GMT 1, sorry, so are you having a go or not? seems like your posts were accusing people of doing so, quote "I'm just trying to ask a question but nobody seems to want to give an answer, here it is again, is it the view of the forum that publishing personal details like addresses and phone numbers is the appropriate response to someone who registers domain names not to use them but to prevent others from using them ?" If you werent having a go at people on this forum I apologise, if you were then as I said, no one posted that information so i'm not sure what your point is...... Allow me to ask you something. Are you accusing Silky of cybersquatting with the name of this forum? I believe (although i may be wrong) that Silky has talked with Banksys people about the name of this forum, and they are more than happy that it is here and continues to thrive......
I haven't, as yet, had a go at anyone or made any accusations. Neither have I said that anyone posted that information I simply asked for opinions as too whether or not people would deem that hypocritical or if it would be an appropriate response to make during a discussion on the subject of cyber squatters.
Now to your question "Are you accusing Silky of cybersquatting with the name of this forum?". Well until you asked I was of the opinion that cyber squatting was the act of registering a domain name without the intention of using it, thereby denying others the opportunity unless they were to buy it back from you, so I would have said no. That said, the home page and the Admins posts do contain domain names which are registered to him but go here when clicked so that would be cyber squatting, no ?
However, after reading your question I wondered about how this term is defined and discovered that cyber squatting is done "with the intention of selling OR profiting from its use", given that the Admin recently posted that he receives a revenue from this forum then I'd have to change my opinion and say yes.
sorry, so are you having a go or not? seems like your posts were accusing people of doing so, quote "I'm just trying to ask a question but nobody seems to want to give an answer, here it is again, is it the view of the forum that publishing personal details like addresses and phone numbers is the appropriate response to someone who registers domain names not to use them but to prevent others from using them ?" If you werent having a go at people on this forum I apologise, if you were then as I said, no one posted that information so i'm not sure what your point is...... Allow me to ask you something. Are you accusing Silky of cybersquatting with the name of this forum? I believe (although i may be wrong) that Silky has talked with Banksys people about the name of this forum, and they are more than happy that it is here and continues to thrive...... I haven't, as yet, had a go at anyone or made any accusations. Neither have I said that anyone posted that information I simply asked for opinions as too whether or not people would deem that hypocritical or if it would be an appropriate response to make during a discussion on the subject of cyber squatters. Now to your question " Are you accusing Silky of cybersquatting with the name of this forum?". Well until you asked I was of the opinion that cyber squatting was the act of registering a domain name without the intention of using it, thereby denying others the opportunity unless they were to buy it back from you, so I would have said no. That said, the home page and the Admins posts do contain domain names which are registered to him but go here when clicked so that would be cyber squatting, no ? However, after reading your question I wondered about how this term is defined and discovered that cyber squatting is done "with the intention of selling OR profiting from its use", given that the Admin recently posted that he receives a revenue from this forum then I'd have to change my opinion and say yes.
|
|
|
Unfuckingbelievable, by wizzy on Jul 2, 2009 13:43:35 GMT 1, Good afternoon Ulysee.
Good afternoon Ulysee.
|
|
|
Unfuckingbelievable, by schlomo on Jul 2, 2009 14:03:10 GMT 1, oh, my mistake then, i thought when you said......
"Oooh the irony of this thread on this forum"
Was you having a go at people for talking about it, if i'm wrong then i'm wrong, but i'm fairly sure other people thought you were having a go aswell....
Anyway. I can't speak for Silky or the other admins man, however i seem to remember a while back Silky changed the info email address so that it came up as Banksy on peeps inboxes. I think that lasted about 2 seconds before he was told to change it back. Again i may be incorrect but if he has permission to use the name for the site then it cant be called cybersquatting, yes he makes an income from advertising etc, but not by selling the name, by selling the advertising space. The guy selling the BanksyBristol.com site (or whatever it was, i cant remember and to be honest i've lost alot of interest in it), is attempting to sell the name. It is entirely different and i'm sure would be deemed so by anyone who knows anything about this particular subject.
oh, my mistake then, i thought when you said......
"Oooh the irony of this thread on this forum"
Was you having a go at people for talking about it, if i'm wrong then i'm wrong, but i'm fairly sure other people thought you were having a go aswell....
Anyway. I can't speak for Silky or the other admins man, however i seem to remember a while back Silky changed the info email address so that it came up as Banksy on peeps inboxes. I think that lasted about 2 seconds before he was told to change it back. Again i may be incorrect but if he has permission to use the name for the site then it cant be called cybersquatting, yes he makes an income from advertising etc, but not by selling the name, by selling the advertising space. The guy selling the BanksyBristol.com site (or whatever it was, i cant remember and to be honest i've lost alot of interest in it), is attempting to sell the name. It is entirely different and i'm sure would be deemed so by anyone who knows anything about this particular subject.
|
|
lalinea
New Member
Posts โข 547
Likes โข 0
January 2008
|
Unfuckingbelievable, by lalinea on Jul 2, 2009 14:14:36 GMT 1, Ridiculous
Ridiculous
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Unfuckingbelievable, by spirit on Jul 2, 2009 14:18:26 GMT 1, I'm just trying to ask a question but nobody seems to want to give an answer, here it is again, is it the view of the forum that publishing personal details like addresses and phone numbers is the appropriate response to someone who registers domain names not to use them but to prevent others from using them ? Be interesting to hear the Admins views on this.
To answer your question directly, I'm not sure the forum has an official view on the the appropriate response to domain name squatting as this is a street art forum - not a domain name forum - so, for the most part, it is just not relevant to the core activity of the forum.
However, I accept that by registering/squatting a banksy domain name and attempting to flog it for a ridiculous amount of money you have made the issue somewhat relevant to this forum. And, in my view, the general response you have received, which seems to be a combination of amusement and derision, seems reasonably appropriate.
PS. Just to be clear, your question implied that "personal details like addresses and phone numbers" were published here. They were not. A link was simply given to relevant public domain information - which again, imo, seems reasonably appropriate.
I'm just trying to ask a question but nobody seems to want to give an answer, here it is again, is it the view of the forum that publishing personal details like addresses and phone numbers is the appropriate response to someone who registers domain names not to use them but to prevent others from using them ? Be interesting to hear the Admins views on this. To answer your question directly, I'm not sure the forum has an official view on the the appropriate response to domain name squatting as this is a street art forum - not a domain name forum - so, for the most part, it is just not relevant to the core activity of the forum. However, I accept that by registering/squatting a banksy domain name and attempting to flog it for a ridiculous amount of money you have made the issue somewhat relevant to this forum. And, in my view, the general response you have received, which seems to be a combination of amusement and derision, seems reasonably appropriate. PS. Just to be clear, your question implied that "personal details like addresses and phone numbers" were published here. They were not. A link was simply given to relevant public domain information - which again, imo, seems reasonably appropriate.
|
|
|