For Sale MSN Quote of the Day

[lionfish]

Seriously contending to take the heat off 'Elvis is Alive' claims, the MSN posts are guaranteed to entertain to no end.

In that regard, I am going to post one quote hopefully daily (I am not here every day) so that all of us can benefit and really absorb the wisdom that abounds in each

I will also add some comments about the context in which the quote was made and award the quote with a 'Fun Score' and 'X-file Score'

http://www.dnforum.com/f510/sibername-bulent-turkoglu-sold-mho-ca-someone-else-thread-323262.html

The original owner did not know that Sibername transferred the domain to a third party

Context:

MSN claims that mho.ca registered 3 years ago to Y was transferred away from Y without Y still (3 years later) having any idea that it was transferred!

Of note that CIRA sends numerous emails for every registrant transfer even when CWA (Change without approval) is in place.

So what MSN is stating:

a) Y registered the domain first

b) Domain was taken away from him without his knowledge despite the multiple CIRA notifications in that regard and the need to approve any transfer with CIRA.

c) That still 3 years later, Y still has no idea that the domain was taken from him.



Thank you God for MSN to uncover this conspiracy. Time for Mulder to pack his bags. MSN is here to take over.

Fun Score: 6/10

'X-file' Score: 9/10

 

[Zoobar]

Why don't both parties stop slinging mud at each other and try to to determine what has happened here?

Lets take everything for face value.

MSN has had a number of names transferred away without his knowledge. As you stated, CIRA does send out notices when critical changes are made. Regardless, of whether MSN received notice or not the facts remain as follows:

MSN bought and paid for TBR names caught by a registrar.
At some point, a critical change to the registrant details was made without approval of MSN. (ownership transfer).
At some point after the critical change has been made, MSN becomes aware that an unauthorized registrant transfer has taken place.
MSN is no longer the registrant of the domain names.
MSN is trying to get the names back.

The registrar sold the domain name registrations to MSN via TBR sessions.
The registrar did not resell the domain names to another party.

CIRA has not responded to any of MSN's queries. MSN is not CIRA's customer. If CIRA did respond, they would refer him to the registrar. The registrar is CIRA's customer, CIRA will respond to all queries by the registrar.

These are the facts as I see them. If the facts above are accurate and true then MSN has to stop accusing the registrar of stealing the names and the registrar has to stop accusing MSN of lying.

Ultimately, the registrar is the only one who can get at the truth to what has happened here. They and only they, can request all the records of the domain names from CIRA. If something unforeseen has happened, it is the duty of care of the registrar to investigate and if needed, with CIRA's assistance to rectify. If the truth is MSN is full of shite then, ...good luck to him.

It shouldn't take more than 5 minutes to determine if the domain names were transferred without MSN's approval or not. The CIRA records will speak for themselves.

 

[theinvestor]

If someone gives rights to a registrar to do as they wish with a domain. (CWA)

Does that mean CIRA would not care whether it was just or not? I mean...if it's a contract...it's not really theft by the registrar....although it would seem that way to MSN.

Not sure if i am making sense....but...if someone hacks into my account and approves changes. In which way would CIRA prove that it wasn't me? Well...i would assume by IP address. But in the case above...since the registrar has rights to transfer the domain if they wish ..and they did so. Maybe CIRA doesn't care? Even though..it could be theft.....

A lot to think about...

 

[DropWizard.com]

When Sibername catches a name the cira account is opened with them in charge and holding all the account privileges.

When they collapse the new account into yours you get to approve it. But if you fail to approve it they remain in control of the new account and the domain and you would never see or approve any of the emails concerning transfer to another registrant, lapsing or anything else.

And they have forgotten to even transfer domains. I've had to go after them several times for domains they forgot to initiate the transfer process for.

So what MSN is saying is quite possible even probable from what I have seen.:undecided:

 

[lionfish]

When they collapse the new account into yours you get to approve it. But if you fail to approve it they remain in control of the new account and the domain and you would never see or approve any of the emails concerning transfer to another registrant, lapsing or anything else.

CIRA requires all registrant transfers and merges to be approved. The following emails are sent in case of registrant transfer:

a) Request to approve registrant transfer
b) Notification that transfer is complete or that transfer was cancelled because of it not being approved in the allotted 14 day period.

In other words, CIRA will send TWO emails for ORIGINAL domain owner irrespective of whether transfer was complete or not.

In case of registrant merge, CIRA will also send two emails notifications to both registrants being merged:

a) Request to approve registrant merge
b) Notification that merge is complete or that merge was cancelled because of it not being approved in the allotted period.

All the above would still be sent in case of CWA.

To suggest that any merge or transfer can happen without a multiple CIRA emails is really ludicrous.

MSN statement is that he IS CERTAIN that the original owner of mho.ca domain DOES NOT KNOW that he is no more the domain owner.

In other words, MSN knows but original domain owner does not.

So the original domain owner for some bizarre reason fails to receive multiple CIRA notifications, fails to attempt to do anything with that domain, like park, or develop, never tries to renew the domain in 3 years, and still 3 years later he is clueless that the domain is no more in his name.

And to seal the deal, MSN himself knows about this great mystery. How does he know? CIRA notifications are sent only to the registrant admin contact. So MSN would never ever receive any of these notifications. Unless that fictional original owner is MSN's client and he made him the admin contact. And if so, why didn't MSN alert the original domain owner who also happens to be his client? Why did he keep him in his ignorance still believing that a domain he registered 3 years ago and never had to renew is no more his?

A real X-file.

So I would like to know who really believes that the MSN claims have even 1% chance of being true, namely that the original domain owner still does not know that his domain was taken away from him but MSN himself knows, and has always known.

There is no voodoo with dot ca domains. The rules are simple and clear. If you have ever owned few .ca domains, have gone through few transfers, registered few TBRs, renewed few domains, then you know how the system works. And no there is no special system for MSN and his fictional clients.

I will go as far as say this: It is 100% impossible that what MSN is claiming has actually happened. That is IMPOSSIBLE. And if MSN is able to prove that these actually happened, I vow in public and on this forum, that I will no more post on any thread related to MSN. And that I will send $500 to the Canadian Red Cross and post a copy of the receipt here within 48 hours of when proof is submitted

Go ahead MSN. Prove me wrong.

P.S. The above challenge does not apply if MSN was himself the admin contact for the domain owner then sold the domain to another party without advising the domain owner of such leaving that latter under the impression that he still owns the domain. In that scenario, domain owner would never get any notifications from CIRA since they would go directly to MSN and so would not be aware of the transfers. Furthermore, that domain owner maybe a complete newbie and so all that he would know would be what MSN tells him. It would also explain why MSN would not tell original domain owner of situation since he would be the one that transferred the domain away without authorization. Who knows? Maybe he's been paying MSN renewal fee every year for that domain he no longer has.

I personally do not believe this scenario hence my challenge stands. But this is the only situation where I can see mho.ca being transferred away from a suspposed original owner without that one knowing about the transfer and still 3 years later having no clue that it was transferred.

 

[msn]

MSN has had a number of names transferred away without his knowledge.

This is correct.

As you stated, CIRA does send out notices when critical changes are made.

This is not clear - when Sibername creates an account and Sibername approves the CIRA agreement on your behalf - something which I think is not proper either at CIRA or under law when Sibername does not possess power of attorney - then Sibername also sets the CWA, again without authority to do so, and they have your name on an account that they control; a vulture with a virtual meat puppet.

MSN bought and paid for TBR names caught by a registrar.
At some point, a critical change to the registrant details was made without approval of MSN. (ownership transfer).
At some point after the critical change has been made, MSN becomes aware that an unauthorized registrant transfer has taken place.
MSN is no longer the registrant of the domain names.
MSN is trying to get the names back.

This is very correct.

The registrar sold the domain name registrations to MSN via TBR sessions.

This is correct also.

The registrar did not resell the domain names to another party.

Whoops! Not correct.

Bulent Turkoglu did then go and sell the domain registrations to other people. We have the e-mail where Bulent Turkoglu says so based on erroneous claims of an unpaid bill. Again, even if there would have been an unpaid bill, the moment Bulent Turkoglu sold those domain registrations to other people, Bulent Turkoglu crossed the line.

CIRA has not responded to any of MSN's queries. MSN is not CIRA's customer. If CIRA did respond, they would refer him to the registrar. The registrar is CIRA's customer, CIRA will respond to all queries by the registrar.

Indeed CIRA said it was an issue with Bulent Turkoglu, who refused to deal with the matter and who removed every trace of the issue from his "support" ticket system.

Ultimately, the registrar is the only one who can get at the truth to what has happened here. They and only they, can request all the records of the domain names from CIRA. If something unforeseen has happened, it is the duty of care of the registrar to investigate and if needed, with CIRA's assistance to rectify. If the truth is MSN is full of shite then, ...good luck to him.

It shouldn't take more than 5 minutes to determine if the domain names were transferred without MSN's approval or not. The CIRA records will speak for themselves.

Yet Sibername has not moved. Bulent Turkoglu decides to hide his pretty pie hole behind a new name here to rattle on about his dented pride but does not walk the walk. If Mr. Bulent Turkoglu operating as domain-name.ca or Mr. Bulent Turkoglu as the person behind Sibername Inc. wants to say the claims are not true and he is being defamed then sue now!

 

[lionfish]

I am going to again summarize my post above:

a) It is impossible that what MSN is claiming has actually happened, namely that there is an original mho.ca domain owner that never knew and still does not know that his domain was taken away from him but MSN himself knows, and has always known.

b) I am inviting anyone that believes that there is even a 1% chance that MSN claims are true to post on this thread and explain their reason to believe.

c) The challenge is for MSN to prove that his mho.ca claim has actually happened. In return, I will make a $500 payment to the canadian Red Cross and post a copy of the receipt on this forum. And I will no more reply to any of MSN posts irrespective of what I personally think of them.

The challenge will run till Sunday September 21, 2008 at 11:59 pm EST.

P.S> I have changed both the method and recipient of the payment to the canadian red cross.

 

[msn]

So twist and turn, coward, and edit your posts to change what you said. You were challenged on facts and now you try to make it to be something else.

And by the way, show me where I said the domain owner "still does not know that his domain was taken away from him" you moral midget.

Your $500 are still to be sent to my lawyer - you can find the right thread by yourself.

 

[lionfish]

Less than 55 hours remain for the challenge to expire and for MSN to win my leaving him and all his amazing claims in peace. Will the Canadian Red Cross get $500? I again invite anyone that believes that there is even a 1% chance that MSN claims are true to post on this thread and explain their reason to believe. Have a great weekend everyone.

 

[msn]

Show the cash jerk - I would not trust that you would put the money anywhere, and others seem to agree.

 

[lionfish]

As expected, deadline passed and MSN is not even one tiny step closer to prove the wild claim referred to here. I made it very clear that it was impossible that his claims represent the truth. Since there is no magic, vodoo, or psychic factors invloved in how dot ca domains work, the various dnforum members here that have registered, renewed or transferred dot ca domains have agreed that there is not even 1% chance that MSN claims are nothing but false and pure confabulations.

And as expected, and even with my offering him the great incentive of myself never commenting on any of his posts again, MSN failed to add any credibility to his bizarre statements.

I wonder what does constitute defamation more than a series of unsubstantiated claims and slanderous attacks by someone that has been kicked out by a company and where he is unable to prove any of his statements. He has the motive (He is mad at sibername for kicking him out) and can only act out through a series of wild and unsubstantiated claims that aim purely to destroy the company's goodwill.

Of note is that not a single DnForum member is willing to go on record that they believe that MSN claims have even 1% chance of having actually happened. Note that a court of law will require irrefutable proof and the lack of reasonable doubt to accept the validity of a statement. And not a single person (except MSN partner in crime DropWizard and the real mastermind here) is willing to accept that it is even 1% likely that what MSN is saying has actually happened. And that's why MSN never went to court for the alleged harm that he suffered from through sibername actions. He simply has no case and is unable of proving any of his defamatory claims.

Coming up....Another installment of MSN Quote of the Day.

 

[lionfish]

Time to move on to the next episode of 'MSN Quote of the Day'.

http://www.dnforum.com/f510/so-wher...ty-thread-go-2-thread-320170.html#post1544301

This is MSN commenting on what a registrar should do if MSN did not pay for a domain the registrar acquired on his behalf in TBR

Now if someone does not pay ...... there is no right to make a transfer of any registration without the knowledge and approval of the RANT.

Under Ontario law, you would have to provide an invoice, demand payment, have the payment either rejected or go to small claims court or take it to collection.

LOL ..... LOL....ROFL...LOL...LOL MSN...You really crack me up. Just from what planet did you come? How did common sense escape your galaxy?

Imagine this...One lists a domain with Sedo, an auction ensues, MSN is highest bidder but refuses to pay. What he then wants is for Sedo to do all that he listed above instead of just awarding the domain to the next bidder. LOL..

Good luck with that MSN.

Calling on all domain owners that ever sold a domain in any venue..... Please share what you feel about what MSN is preaching to be the correct method of action. If the highest bidder on any of your domains is MSN and he refuses to pay, do you really believe that he should keep the domain, that the aftermarket takes al steps detailed above, while you no more have the domain and do not get paid?

Fun Factor: 8.5/10
X-file factor: 8/10

LOL

 

[msn]

Time to move on to the next episode of 'MSN Quote of the Day'.

http://www.dnforum.com/f510/so-wher...ty-thread-go-2-thread-320170.html#post1544301

This is MSN commenting on what a registrar should do if MSN did not pay for a domain the registrar acquired on his behalf in TBR

LOL ..... LOL....ROFL...LOL...LOL MSN...You really crack me up. Just from what planet did you come? How did common sense escape your galaxy?

Imagine this...One lists a domain with Sedo, an auction ensues, MSN is highest bidder but refuses to pay. What he then wants is for Sedo to do all that he listed above instead of just awarding the domain to the next bidder. LOL..

Good luck with that MSN.

Calling on all domain owners that ever sold a domain in any venue..... Please share what you feel about what MSN is preaching to be the correct method of action. If the highest bidder on any of your domains is MSN and he refuses to pay, do you really believe that he should keep the domain, that the aftermarket takes al steps detailed above, while you no more have the domain and do not get paid?

Fun Factor: 8.5/10
X-file factor: 8/10

LOL

Listen you assh#le - you have crossed the line. Sedo auctions are for registered domains, not TBR, and if you want to mix the two together and then start to make it sound as if I backed away from a Sedo auction, ever then you are a liar and a scoundrel.

If you do not know the difference between making a domain registration and auctioning off an already existing domain, you should stop now.

You made a big deal about putting $500 on the line and paying up for proof, but overnight you edit your posts and offer to make then a "donation" instead, with no cash to back it up.

You then threatened legal action against DNForum when a thread went up with the preparations to outline exactly the proof which you say you wanted to see.

Reveal yourself, oh coward, before you fall away.

 

[lionfish]

This dude MSN is quite a treat. Has he ever heard of the right to remain silent and that anything that he may say may be used against him?

Our next MSN quote of the day comes from his latest reply above:

Sedo auctions are for registered domains, not TBR, and if you want to mix the two together and then start to make it sound as if I backed away from a Sedo auction, ever then you are a liar and a scoundrel.

Very Very interesting.

So basically it is clear from the above that MSN believes it is OK to back away from a TBR domain auction since I will be a liar only if I am suggesting he would back away from a Sedo auction.

In other words...

MSN believes is OK that he does not pay for the domain he won through a sibername auction.

MSN believes it is OK to deny sibername of the funds he agreed to pay them if they secured him the domain.

Now some background info for those that did not use sibername TBR auction in 2005. The system was very close to namespro system now. An auction is run prior to TBR run and the owner of the highest bid on a certain domain by bidding deadline gets the domain registered directly to him/her at TBR time. Let's take an example. 10 domainers place bids on XXXdomainYYY.ca. When bidding stops, MSN would have placed a $250 top bid on that domain while the next bid would be $240. Then if sibername gets the domain during TBR, the domain is registered directly in MSN name.

Now read the above and you understand what is going on. Because the domain got registered directly to MSN, he decided it is OK not to pay since after all he already has the domain and since he believes that he is off limit because, and I am again quoting him:

Now if someone does not pay ...... there is no right to make a transfer of any registration without the knowledge and approval of the RANT. Under Ontario law, you would have to provide an invoice, demand payment, have the payment either rejected or go to small claims court or take it to collection.

So not only MSN denies Sibername the fee he agreed to pay them if they register the domain to MSN, but also the other domainers that placed bids on that domain, in particular the one with the next highest bid.

But the surprise came when sibername outsmarted him and when he failed to pay in time, used CWA to award the domain to the next top bidder (This of course no more applies now because now all won TBR domains are registered in registrar name who then transfers them to the registrant after the payment is made. This is followed across the board except namespro who may very well become the next target for MSN ). And by doing that, Sibername protected its interests, remained loyal the entity that should get the domain and that is the person that placed the highest legitimate bid, and prevented MSN from benefitting from his scam

Now who can tell me who stole from who and who is the real scammer and thief?

I wonder what MSN partner in crime DW would think if he placed the second largest bid and MSN was the top bidder but MSN never paid the registrar and still kept the domain?

No MSN...It is not right to scam the registrar

It is not right not to pay for a TBR auction you won

It is not right to place a shill bid that you never plan to honor and yes that does apply to TBR

It is not right to deny the domainer that placed the highest legitimate to-be-honored bid from getting the domain.

I do not know what is worse, whether MSN does not understand the very simple statements above, or whether he does and still acts in such a regrettable way.

I have been awarding fun score for all these quotes. Unfortunately, there is no fun here. In reality, it is a sad and sickening case of how low one will go to scam legitimate companies that 99.99% of domainers use without a single issue.

Shame on you MSN. Really. Shame on you.

Fun Score: 0

Shame score: 10