Rick Schwartz and The Unbearable Silencing Power of Money

[Brujah]

Originally posted by NameBox
What are you talking about Brujah?

Cheese.

[NameBox]

GeogeK,

Your comments suggest an undercurrent of envy. You ask others to document "evidence" of their claims of sales success, but offer no evidence of your own. Why is that? Should we now start doubting your credibility? Have you ever sold a name? Waiting ...

This slagging back and forth is frankly pointless. One thing I will say, is that I do know several people who have been doing business with DnP, and that business involves NUMEROUS domain sales on a monthly basis involving individual multi $10,000 sales PER domain.

How many domains have you sold for 10/20/30/40/50/60 .... thousands of dollars GeorgeK? How many seller's pockets have you lined with big dollars?

You may not like his style or comments, but rest assured, those who choose to deal with him, and have REAL money to spend, or excellent domains to sell, have been satisfied.

Now, my participation here is due to my interest in developement. I don't buy and sell domains regularly, therefore, I don't have a vested interest in this discussion. Just pointing out the facts.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

As for the Domain King, Rick Schwartz, power to him. He seems sincere in helping others, and his advice is not pie in the sky, but makes a lot of common sense. Lets not forget, however, that he does benefit from having the public board open, and having sales offers come his way. Don't know him. Nothing against him. If its a rags to riches story, more power to him!

However, I assume that most of his revenue has been derived from (to phrase it nicely) his "adult" holdings. Porn is Porn after all. Not everyone wants to get involved with "adult" sites or content, even though it is the most profitable niche out there.

He is the self styled "Domain King", and has promoted himself as such in the press. With such a public persona, one should expect criticism as well as praise. Comes with the territory.

What I don't approve of is his "money is the only way to keep score". Frankly, a little silly don't you all think?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's all just take a deep breath .... and relax now.

[NameBox]

Originally posted by Brujah


Cheese.

What type of Cheese? Starting to smell like Gorgonzola in here lately ....

[DnPowerful]

Originally posted by GeorgeK
Good. Now perhaps the detractors will post their "evidence", if they have any. (I'm not a "detractor", just someone who is out for the truth, on all sides; maybe that means I get hated by all sides ). Remember when others were defaming Cameron a while ago, I was against that too.

It's the BS, lact of tact and diplomacy, that turns off many. e.g. go back to some of Cameron's Usenet posts:

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...&output=gplain

"Subject: My gift to the people in this newsgroup: HONESTY"

"I've been selling domains since '93 and I've made lots and lots of
money, and now that I'm leaving the biz"

Selling names since '93? Doubtful. It doesn't look like you've left the biz...

"4. Brokers are useless" If indeed Cameron is simply brokering names, and not acting as the principal, that too is telling. It's ok to be a broker.

Things like that affect one's credibility. If one wants to renounce one's past, having moved to a new level, that's great. Going on someone else's board, though, and anonymously taking pot shots at them, and trying to sell $75 names for $3,000 doesn't make one look good or inspire confidence/trust, though.

Anyhow, if folks want to persist, I'm not "involved", as I've never dealt with Cameron on names before, nor have first hand knowledge of his history (others know him from Afternic). It's up to others to let us know what to be wary of, beyond the usual due diligence. Claiming to also be the top buyer in the world should also be taken with a grain of salt, just marketing, when we know of many others who've done lots of buying in the background, and not on forums, solely on drops for instance (I'm not one of them, but see them beat me all the time ).

[edited to fix a couple of typos]

George:

There's no other way to say it: you're being a fool.

Here is the *full* quote from my newsgroup posting:

"4. Brokers are useless, unless you're selling big names that require
smooth talking to nail down $180,000 payday. Some individuals are
perfectly capable of selling their own big names, but many are not.
However, when it comes to smaller names, there's absolutely no reason to
use a broker, unless you simply don't want to know."

No contradiction there to my views today.

I did leave the biz' many times vowing never to return, but the market has gone in massive waves, and I returned. So what?

As for posting "anonymously" on Rick's Board, I told you privately that Rick has known who I am for months. You're so out of the loop it's rather comical. There's a whole raft of history you're simply not privvy to. Believe me, if I wanted to anonymously take potshots, I 'd use an anonymizer service. Duh.

You say you've never done business with me, but you're prepared to take a single archived newsgroup posting as the key to who I am and what I stand for. Get a grip. I guess that's what passes for "meeting" someone in the digital age. At least quote the text in its full context.

Having called me a "fake" and been shown the real, hard numbers via MattyP, please feel free to skulk away. You obviously wouldn't look at the numbers yourself because you'd have to admit just how wrong you were.

As for tact and diplomacy, I have plenty for those worthy of it. Facts are usually a good start, not heresay.

[DnPowerful]

Originally posted by Brujah
There's a lot of bias in here from the DNForum moderators against someone that doesn't even post here. I hope they don't continue to sell-out so easily. I guess their integrity is for sale at the price of a glimpse at some stats or receiving a few dollars.

This flame thread being supported by the moderators is sickening. The favoritism is OBVIOUS.

That's truly laughable.

Rick is free to post here, but he won't because

a) It's an admission that there's a world out there besides his KingDumb.

and

b) He'd have to play by the rules of moderation, and wouldn't be able to call me a "sicko" as he has this morning (class act, once again).

Instead, he can count on the loyal flock like you to come in and say things like "integrity is for sale" here with a straight face.

[Brujah]

DNPowerful, you don't know the first thing about me so keep your assumptions where they belong, up your A**

[NameBox]

Originally posted by Brujah
DNPowerful, you don't know the first thing about me so keep your assumptions where they belong, up your A**

Be Nice Brujah! No need for profanity

On the subject of moderated boards, Rick's board does have a moderator ... Rick! As is his priviledge in running his private but "public" board. He does "ban" IPs doesn't he? There are no "transparent" moderators to appeal to there I assume.

Rick's a big boy, and can handle himself I'm sure. I don't think that this thread really needed moderation. Nonething here that discredits DKs integrity or questions his accomplishments.

Originally posted by Brujah
There's a lot of bias in here from the DNForum moderators against someone that doesn't even post here. I hope they don't continue to sell-out so easily. I guess their integrity is for sale at the price of a glimpse at some stats or receiving a few dollars.

This flame thread being supported by the moderators is sickening. The favoritism is OBVIOUS.

I have not seen any bias, and I think this is a pretty serious allegation, particularly the "receiving a few dollars" part.

Please explain.

Miles

[AMERICAR]

This has to be the biggest Dan bux dollar makeing thread ever started here.

Geeezzz how to get rich in a very short time ...

[GeorgeK]

NameBox: I've never claimed to have been the top adult buyer on the planet, or other grandiose claims, and thus have little to backup. However, some of my activities are quite easy to verify, since they take place on drops. Anyone can view the prices I've paid on names caught at NameWinner or NicGenie, e.g. nuclearbomb.com was caught for me for $1,006. Since May 12, 2002 (the date I've been tracking names on a current worksheet, although I've gone for names before that) I count 31 names caught on drops for me. I'm not a BuyDomains, Ultsearch, Dinoia, etc., and never pretended to be, but I obtain my share of names for development.

I rarely sell names (that's not my goal when I buy them -- if I can't use them, they're not of use to me). One that I did sell went for a price I was happy with, but I don't tout its sale to everyone I know, and every stranger. I don't promise "riches" to people who deal with me, though, saying they'll get the top price in the world, but I do buy names in the secondary market, e.g. games.org among others. My purchases on Afternic are public knowledge, too (e.g. webslots.com a few months ago, a nice little pickup, at:

http://www.afternic.com/~webslots.com

which outbid Slavik, who left a little scrap of a name for me to grab ).

Cameron: you still pretend to be from LA, and even after you were outed, posted as "Dan Norman". It seems obviously very important to you to continue your charade, through ad hominen attacks ("arguments that attack the person making the argument instead of the argument itself") rather than sticking to facts and actions.

It's funny that you call me and others a loyal flock, when all I'm loyal to is the truth (which both sides might hate me for, but which makes me sleep easy at night).

Why don't you stick to the facts, and tell us about the domain names you were selling in 1993?

[NameBox]

GeorgeK,

Respectfully, outspending Slavik for a whopping total of $210 for webslots.com hardly qualifies you as a "player". Wow!

Further, you really shouldn't be making statements like "you may or may not be a fraud ... I have no personal knowledge of this ..." (I'm paraphrasing here of course ... but look at your post).

You are trying to libel another here, and hide cowardly under the "I don't really know ..." defense. Pathetic really. I'll refrain from questioning your integrity in a similar fashion.

Bottom line. Envy is obvious. It outs itself. You haven't commented on our assersion that DnP HAS bought and sold many names monthly in the 6 figure range. Have you bought or sold one?

Regarding using different "personas", I assume many people don't want their behavior on forums or boards tracked publically. What really matters is if DnP (or anyone else) has ever screwed someone in a transaction, or is (as you imply) incapable of doing 6 figure deals. Any proof of this GeorgeK?

I would be circumspect, if I were you, of frequenting a pornographic board (lets face it, the public not to mention the big board is mostly about adult ... that's the underlying theme), using your "true" identity. What would your "big bank" clients think of GeorgeK's dabbles into porn? Do you own any porn names, or operate any porn sites? Yes, No, Maybe? Are you into porn or finance? See how easy it is to discredit someone? FOR EXAMPLE: I have no "personal" knowledge of any activities you may have in the adult world. I can neither confirm nor deny your operation of any adult sites. (see ridiculous isn't it GeorgeK?) I am being sarcastic here of course, so don't get all out or sorts ...I only made the above statement to show you the error of your ways.

On the subject of IPs, it seems DKs resolves to CA and not FL where it is assumed he's located. Now, are we to assume he's "hiding" something, or maybe travelling ...

Lastly, transparency is fine when you have real money to spend. Not really an issue when you're spending $210.00. Further, ever think that buyers or sellers in many cases, don't want everything broadcasted loudly? Transparency seems to be your calling card ... and thats great ... but its not going to appease someone waiting patiently for your wire transfer

Let's all be nice, and leave the venom at the door

[ShaunP]

"I would be circumspect, if I were you, of frequenting a pornographic board (lets face it, the public not to mention the big board is mostly about adult ... that's the underlying theme),"

... too funny!

[krisblade]

DNPowerful, please keep your fans locked.

Nice post BTW

[NameBox]

circumspect

\Cir"cum*spect\, a. [L. circumspectus, p. p. of circumspicere to look about one's self, to observe; circum + spicere, specere, to look. See Spy.] Attentive to all the circumstances of a case or the probable consequences of an action; cautious; prudent; wary.

Syn: See Cautious.
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.


Didn't understand what was so funny in your estimation, so I offer you the Dictionary definition ....

[NameBox]

Originally posted by krisblade
DNPowerful, please keep your fans locked.

Nice post BTW

What "fans" are you referring to, and to what do you want them "locked" to exactly?

[GeorgeK]

NameBox: I'm not envious, as you suggest. Instead of trying to turn arguments once again into ad hominen attacks, try to focus on facts. I gave examples of little sales, and never said I was into the huge ones. I said I was open minded, and willing to see both sides.

I also asked specific questions, like the 1993 sales. Don't you think it stretches credibility to say one was buying and selling names in 1993? It's almost like someone who is 23 putting on their resume that they've got 20 years of experience with UNIX. How many domains do you think were bought and sold in 1993??

What I didn't resort to is the kinds of personal attacks that others are trying to reduce this to. Notice I never used the word "fraud" first -- those were words put into my mouth, and I made no comment on them, as I said I don't know the guy. I have no reason to believe whatsoever that he's cheated anyone, just that his style is abrasive, and he stretches credibility at times. Others do that as well, and I still can do business with them, once proper due diligence is performed.

I'm not the ones going into forums under a fake name saying:

"Ah, all the Rick Shwartz sycophants start their pissing to please the King."

Anyhow, we've gone wayyyyy off topic. Let's try to stick to facts, for those willing to provide some, they'll affect one's perception of themselves. For folks willing to provide no facts, they'll tend to be in a cloud, by their own desire.

I wholeheartedly agree that venom should be left at the door, and folks need to continue acting in a professional manner.

[NameBox]

GeorgeK,

You questioned DnP's ability to do deals, and IMPLIED at least that he may be a fraudster. Don't hide behind your verbiage.

We've told you that he has closed big deals. There is a fact for you. You haven't mentioned or accepted this fact!

Do you have any proof to the contrary? No? Then quiet down. Searching through Deja is pretty petty don't you think Sherlock?

Regarding your DUE DILIGENCE. Fancy, $5.00 words, but really, they just show that you aren't really a player in this market.

The guys who are realling paying big money, are usually in adult, and they act in hours (if not minutes). By acting I mean effecting a wire transfer (not asking for documents, chats on the phone, faxes, and time to do due diligence). They leave due diligence to an escrow service, or have done it well in advance.

Being "transparent" and doing due diligence can often mean needing "time" to examine documents, fax back and forth, make revisions, ..... in other words stalling ...... until you can somehow raise the money or flip the deal.

Some of the biggest buyers don't want to "chat" on the phone, or start faxing away. They know who the players are .... and they deal with whomever can perform.

By the way, if anyone on the sidelines asked me to disclose me deals (present or past), I'd politely tell them to take a hike. No need to prove to anyone other than the buyer (or seller) that you have the goods. Best proof is a timely wire transfer



Now let's get back to some reasonable discussions ...... and stop the mud slinging

[GeorgeK]

I didn't imply anything. Perhaps you misread the statements, since you put in an implicit point of view behind certain words, but I was being precise in the lack of knowledge of him. Of the stuff we do know, there are both positive elements, and ones that strain credibility, and folks should make their own decision as how to weigh these things. Asking everyone to ignore the negative, and accept all the purported positive isn't something that is in my interest as someone seeking informed choices.

But, I agree, NameBox, this is getting distracting for all of us, and I think we're beating a dead horse.

[DnPowerful]

After dealing with the slightly nutty GeorgeK for the last 24 hours, and his special new role as Chief Interrogator of my life and times, I wondered aloud who exactly he might be.

I called my good friend Ken Campbell, a domainiac and journalist for The Toronto Star. He pointed me to a nifty little article he wrote in The Toronto Star about George, in which the thin-skinned George decided to launch a civil lawsuit against six IRC users who he says caused him to be “banned” from certain parts of IRC and called him names that damaged his reputation.

Please read Ken's story about George here, and tell me this isn't the nuttiest thing you've ever heard of:

http://www.kkc.net/toronto-star/2000/0427/

Here is a satirical magazine's send up of George and his silly, little lawsuit:

http://www.ansible.org/~cat/georgek/ircnews.html

George, welcome to the knife that cuts two ways. Keep on using that real name baby.

[GeorgeK]

Feel free to see: http://www.kirikos.com/legal/ to see how it ended.