Is "first-come, first-served" still neutral in an automated world?

[nicenicnicenic is verified member.]

The rule hasn't changed. But the environment has.

When registrations are driven by bots, scripts, APIs, and speed at scale, does first-come-first-served still feel neutral?

 

[cactusfly]

Context please?

 

[Ricado]

At the end of the day, it’s still first-come, first-served.

It’s like lining up for a limited product. You may leave earlier, but you’re walking. I’m on a motorcycle. I arrive first. The rule hasn’t changed, only the tools have.

Domain registrations work the same way. Whoever successfully gets the order to the registry first gets the name.

Take .app as an example. When it launched, I placed pre-orders at multiple registrars. The results were very different:

Gandi performed the best.
Name.com was second.
GoDaddy didn’t secure a single one for me.

The rules didn’t favor anyone, but infrastructure, registry connections, system performance, and execution speed clearly matter.

The iNet.app and EIP.app I currently hold were both secured during that launch.

First-come, first-served has never meant equal speed. It simply means whoever completes the process first wins.

 

[nicenicnicenic is verified member.]

Context please?

A lot of domains are now bought up before a human even has a chance to click.
With automated systems and pre-set tools, does the speed at which someone can register a domain still reflect the fairness the rule was originally meant to guarantee?
And what about the people who use tools to speed up the registration process?
Are they really “first” anymore? Or are we just automating a process that’s supposed to be based on fairness and equality?

At the end of the day, it’s still first-come, first-served.

It’s like lining up for a limited product. You may leave earlier, but you’re walking. I’m on a motorcycle. I arrive first. The rule hasn’t changed, only the tools have.

Domain registrations work the same way. Whoever successfully gets the order to the registry first gets the name.

Take .app as an example. When it launched, I placed pre-orders at multiple registrars. The results were very different:

Gandi performed the best.
Name.com was second.
GoDaddy didn’t secure a single one for me.

The rules didn’t favor anyone, but infrastructure, registry connections, system performance, and execution speed clearly matter.

The iNet.app and EIP.app I currently hold were both secured during that launch.

First-come, first-served has never meant equal speed. It simply means whoever completes the process first wins.

Exactly, strategy now involves anticipating high-demand launches and positioning your assets effectively before the rush.
At the same time, it's not just about who gets there first, but who’s got the foresight to identify potential hot names and act early, using more than just speed but also smart targeting.

 

[Ricado]

Exactly, strategy now involves anticipating high-demand launches and positioning your assets effectively before the rush.
At the same time, it's not just about who gets there first, but who’s got the foresight to identify potential hot names and act early, using more than just speed but also smart targeting.

Even using tools doesn’t guarantee you win.

I’ve written my own scripts and worked with registrar APIs before. In practice, those APIs are mostly designed for portfolio management, renewals, transfers, and bulk operations. They’re not built for true high-speed drop-catching.

If you really want a serious edge, you need direct registry connectivity. That’s a different level entirely.

That’s also why many drop-catching platforms and aftermarket players try to become accredited registrars. It’s not just about automation. It’s about proximity to the registry and control over the submission pipeline.

Atom recently became an accredited registrar as well. If they decide to support backorders in the near future, that wouldn’t be surprising.

At the end of the day, it’s less about “who clicks first” and more about infrastructure, positioning, and access.