SnapNames and Moniker Return Domain to Prior Owner after Win

[bhartzer]

Thanks for clearing this up, Kjel.

[Dave Zan]

If theres a binding agreement for the loan would SnapNames take the responsibility for any damages?

You kidding? SnapNames' agreement lets them off the hook.

One can believe they're responsible, and SnapNames can believe they're not.
Well, guess where else to answer that question.

[HBK216]

Very invasive as well.. I think the seller lost his right to have the domain returned the minute you paid for the domain you won in auction..

by the way, this leaves the possibility of Sellr XYZ to claim he posted the wrong domain in auction if he/she does not pull the amount $$$ they wanted.. it's b.s., i'd press the issue

I am 100% sure you would not be saying something so ridiculous if you were the original owner.

[domainrock]

42 replies to an error that could have been made by anybody - seriously, people - don't you have anything better to do.... I visit this board about once a month specifically because soooo many threads happen to be like this - a simple waste of time.

In the case of a simple mistake like this what does everyone want Snapnames to do - give the buyer stock in the company, pay the buyer an appraised value of a name and compensate for all the lost revenue from the grand plan the buyer probably would have never developed anyway, or have them provide 100's of solutions to possible outcomes taking time away from creating a fix to help something like this from happening again.

This issue was between the buyer and the seller and snap. It happens .... everywhere from time to time ... snap, sedo, namejet etc.....

Let the parties deal with it and move on.

You all need to smoke some a little tonight and chill.

[Domagon]

Many of the folks here appear to be blaming Snap, when, in my view, the fault is ultimately with Moniker for transferring ownership.

Ron

p.s. Moniker is still having registry / registrar db sync problems; they don't truly know what domains they actually hold - that's not something one would expect from a registrar that's touted as "secure"

[bhartzer]

I am 100% sure you would not be saying something so ridiculous if you were the original owner.

Or if you were the buyer.

[Kjel]

Thanks Bill. And again, sorry. We would have much rather sold you a domain name. This was a pretty serious error on our part and exposed a weakness in our listing process that is currently being addressed. I apologize that you were the inadvertent guinea pig here.

Best,

Kjel Holmberg

[Yofie]

From what I can tell, snapnames sold Rape.org yesterday at auction and the domain was renewed before the auction ended... It was even reported on DnJournal. 7-18 the domain showed it was expired. 7-20 it showed it was renewed and servers changed etc. The Auction ended yesterday (7-22) and I stopped bidding once I had seen it was renewed.

[domaingenius]

42 replies to an error that could have been made by anybody - seriously, people - don't you have anything better to do.... I visit this board about once a month specifically because soooo many threads happen to be like this - a simple waste of time.

In the case of a simple mistake like this what does everyone want Snapnames to do - give the buyer stock in the company, pay the buyer an appraised value of a name and compensate for all the lost revenue from the grand plan the buyer probably would have never developed anyway, or have them provide 100's of solutions to possible outcomes taking time away from creating a fix to help something like this from happening again.

This issue was between the buyer and the seller and snap. It happens .... everywhere from time to time ... snap, sedo, namejet etc.....

Let the parties deal with it and move on.

You all need to smoke some a little tonight and chill.

LOl, yes that sums it up entirely. I lost interest in these types of discussion/threads, hmm maybe 7 years ago at least. Snapnames made
a mistake, they sorted it end of. What I we discussing now, NOTHING.

DG

[Acro]

What I we discussing now, NOTHING.

DG

No response about "halvarez".

[Raider]

With fewer domains dropping at the Registry and now going to the highest bidder, something like this is bound to happen.

[Kjel]

No response about "halvarez".

I didn't really think a response was warranted as this territory has been travelled many time before, but here goes: Halvarez is a high volume customer of SnapNames. If I understand you correctly you want SnapNames to somehow discourage or dissallow his ordering and bidding activity? Why would we do that? Halvarez has no special access and gets no special treatment compared to any other customer. He has his own tactics, but those same tactics can be used by anyone who wants to.

[Raider]

Imagine having someone like Halverez at the Poker table

[Acro]

He has his own tactics, but those same tactics can be used by anyone who wants to.

Would you like to disclose the method he uses so that thousands of "halvarezitos" carpet-bid on auctions that already received bids?

Imagine having someone like Halverez at the Poker table

It's when the chairs are kicked and fisticuffs erupt. The guy is a royal pain to hundreds of bidders that would have paid basic bidding fees if senor halvarez wasn't allowed to post-bid on auctions that already had bids.

So....should Snapnames patch the time hole or should I release the method?

[bhartzer]

So....should Snapnames patch the time hole or should I release the method?

I would release the method. We've already seen other stuff that needs to be fixed.

[Acro]

It's very simple. Halvarez is carpet-bidding safely, being #2 bidder on hundreds of auctions. So much for a "big customer". And then once the actual bidding starts, he can cherry-pick which auctions generate more bids and goes for these. He knows the exact time that he can be Mr. #2 (read: mr shithead). I am not releasing the final key element of this method, hoping that Snapnames will alter the methods of Mr. Halvarez (who people were speculating that might be a rabbit for Snapnames)

[flamewalker]

Uh... they just said they don't believe he is doing anything wrong above, thus they don't think there is anything to "fix"... IMHO, you should just release it... then maybe they will "fix" it cause they will realize its "broken". This, in my mind, may indicate that as you said so tactfully, he is a "rabbit" for Snap. If he is working with/for them, why would they discourage him helping them mass bid on names to see if they go anywhere?

Unless other people discovered how to do it and actually used it, they will likely not change based on their statement above.

[Acro]

I'm not going to clean up Snapnames' own act. As far as I am concerned, they are encouraging this activity; it fools people into raising their bids in fear that senor Halvarez might raise his $59 scare bid.

[speculatr]

Snap gets it right in almost all cases over the years. When they mess up they do a good job of communicating. I don't think you need to worry about this being a consistent problem.

[domaingenius]

While Kjel is on this thread, if there is one thing that irks me about Snapnames ,or as much the partners they work with, is that even after having paid top dollar for domains
some of the registrars the won domains are with start playing games with
ypou to try and get you to renew. Take for example melbourneit.com.au .NOT once has
the auth code detailed in any of the domains I have been correct. They have a
facility ,so they allege, to change such auth code BUT you can be certain, as I
have found, that it ALWAYS comes up with message
Sorry, your Domain Authorisation Password modification failed:
We are currently experiencing technical difficulties, please try again soon.

It has been like that for months and they take ages to reply to emails.
So Kjel, how about having a word with some of your partners like
melbourneit.com.au and get them to act in bonda fide way and stop
these damn timewasting games ??.

DG