rlm
Bonfire.ca
DomainRecap said:
What I really want is for one company to be the leader, to set the example for how it should be done properly so that maybe others may follow suit.
Discuss WHC's Backordering Platform (2.Viewing)
- Topic Starter FM
- Start date
- Replies: Replies 116
- Views: Views 3,267
What I really want is for one company to be the leader, to set the example for how it should be done properly so that maybe others may follow suit.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
- Topics
- 63
- Posts
- 4,580
- Likes
- 2,592
rlm said:
Good luck with that. I'm hoping for World Peace tomorrow.
If that is your actual goal, then let's all be realistic here, and target the registrars who deserve targeting, and leave the pipe dreams to the fools.
Thank you all, sorry if I have touched on a difficult topic.
I think this discussion has clearly shown how much the options on what constitutes "properly" diverge. I agree
I appreciate all of the feedback and would like to reiterate that bidder IDs in whatever form are not currently on our roadmap and many other features (some of them domain-related) are a much higher priority.
rlm said:
I think this discussion has clearly shown how much the options on what constitutes "properly" diverge. I agree
I appreciate all of the feedback and would like to reiterate that bidder IDs in whatever form are not currently on our roadmap and many other features (some of them domain-related) are a much higher priority.
rlm
Bonfire.ca
DomainRecap said:
Any legit domain investor isn't going to get too hung up on who's bidding, they're going to bid based on their valuation of the domain. Anyone trying to learn something can see the complete list of domains that are taken each week, see the patterns, and learn from that. Unless someone here has a reputation as the "Warren Buffet of domains" that I'm not aware of, I don't think people care about individual bidding habits, nor do they have time to weigh those into their own real-time bidding strategies.
And in no way am I talking about publicly revealing everyone's entire bidding histories, so don't make it sound like that's what is happening. What I'm asking for is a very limited level of transparency - just to keep people honest.
In fact, I applied for Frank's job just because a lot of what WHC needed done was something I'd been mulling doing on my own. But I told Emil straight up that I wasn't sure I really wanted the job because in order to take it, I'd have to go cold-turkey with TBR due to the conflict of interest. I have that level of integrity. I'm not sure other people do.
I spent 6 figures buying .CA domain names in 2021. I could easily be as concerned about stalking as anyone. But every week I get some cheap domains for $20 or less. Every week there are plenty of domains that are run up higher than I am interested in paying and I don't chase them. Every week there are some I want and am willing to pay to get it. So if this "stalking" is happening, I don't see it affecting my bidding, and anyone who wants to stalk me, there are way easier ways to do it than focusing on my bidder ID.
What I _would_ like to know is that its a legit person/company bidding against me, not an insider, and not the auction house itself. So you will argue that I must therefore not trust WHC. I do generally trust WHC. Just like I've trusted the other companies before who eventually got outed that some insider was bidding against me. It's most likely going to be a rogue employee thinking they can use their privileged access to information to benefit themselves. There's a member here who's been outed for doing that in their past already. Some companies had famously allowed employees to compete in their own auctions, while others have supposedly banned it. So don't think every company is going to see employees bidding on their own auctions as a problem.
Should we fully trust any company? Amazon uses their own Storefront customer's sales data to identify profitable niches, then gets into that niche and compete with those very customers, often pushing them out. Sometimes the most valuable part of a relationship might be getting access to your data, not just making a few bucks off your services. So no, I don't think we should really fully trust any business online. A little bit of mistrust is probably a good thing for everyone involved. Showing some limited auction transparency is IMO, a way to show that they want to be the most trustworthy in the business.
And before you say it again, no, I don't see that a fixed bidder ID is a violation of privacy. It may be unique, but it does not tie you to anything other than the previous domains bid on, and only to those who outbid you on specific domains. So while a few people might eventually be able to group a few of the domains together as being owned by the same person, we still don't know who that person is.
Most domainers happily list their portfolio, on multiple platforms or even their own websites. And for those that don't, there are many potential clues including whois, registrars used, nameservers, sales platforms used, etc... this limited transparency idea isn't any more revealing than the rest. The only way a bidder ID gets tied to you is if you tie yourself to it.
I can't help but get the feeling that all this stalker talk is a red herring for the real reason you're paranoid about privacy. Not sure what that is, but then again, I really don't care either, that's your hangup, not mine.
In any case, I really don't expect WHC to ever implement bidding IDs. Primarily because its extra work and companies like to do the bare minimum to maximize profits. WHC is coming from the back of the pack trying to catch up with the rest of the herd as far as interface and functionality goes. I don't expect them to really go above and beyond, unless they think it'll net them more profits. A good example is the hot-list and showing their customer's pre-auction bids. That makes it easy for the slackers who don't do their own research and want to jump on the auction bandwagon. I don't like it, you don't like it, but I get why WHC does it. It's good for their bottom line and that's all that matters to them. Implementing bidder ids would take effort and would have an intangible benefit of gaining customer's trust (well, mine at least, not yours). I don't think that's enough benefit for them to justify doing it. The sad reality is, we're stuck using the big two whether we like it or not, whether we trust them or not, whether they screw us or not, we are literally stuck using any business that is successful at obtaining TBR domains.
theinvestor
DNCanada.ca
Well said [notify]rlm[/notify].
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
- Topics
- 63
- Posts
- 4,580
- Likes
- 2,592
rlm said:
Well you're dead wrong them, or theinvestor isn't a "legit" domain investor in your book...
theinvestor said:
Once again. It’s always good to know who you’re bidding against.
And being somewhat of an BI analyst, I totally agree with this statement. Knowledge is power and if you have the right data, you can predict behavior to some extent.
And I'll say this one more time, if you actually believe that "limited transparency Bidder IDs" is going to catch an unethical company, employee or other "insider" with direct access to the system, then I've got a really nice bridge to sell you.
And if a registrar was dirty, why would they design a system that would highlight their wrong-doing? Corporate split-personality?
rlm
Bonfire.ca
DomainRecap said:
We all know you like analyzing stuff. I'd bet you're as much of a stalker as anyone, probably one of the better ones out there if I had to guess. Maybe that's why you're so paranoid about it, you know how powerful stalking has been working for you. And that's great, I actually have no problem with that, this is business. I collect a lot of data too. But I can assure you that bidding strategies have nothing to do with it. I'm focusing on one thing, the domain itself. But I do recall that you've openly made statements on the forum that sounded very stalkish to me, as if you were sending a message that you were smart enough to know who was bidding against you. You've also openly encouraged people to post TBR auction prices for your benefit, yet I don't recall you ever having posted a purchase or sale price of your own. So I can't help but feel that all of this privacy paranoia is extremely hypocritical.
And lets stop calling it stalking - that is just rhetorical hyperbole at best. Are you practising your chops to run for office? Call it a competitor analysis if you like, but stalking implies that its personal, and I seriously doubt its personal.
Then you occasionally insist on taking a valid perspective and throwing in a personal jab or two for sport. That's unfortunately where the mood changes from a discussion to something less pleasant. Any validity to your argument is immediately overshadowed by the negativity. You're really doing yourself a disservice.
DomainRecap said:
Exactly. And the corollary to that would be if a registrar wants to appear clean and actually stay clean (despite the potential for rogue employees coming and going), they'd design a system that would expose wrong-doing and at least make it difficult for the insider to get away with it long term. Maybe only a few employees have access to the code base that would be required for something truly sneaky. But a lot of employees have access to customer profiles, which is why they shouldn't have easy access to bidding against those customers. That's one reason I prefer using a very small registrar. Besides the good personal service, there are a lot fewer people I have to trust.
Groot
Member
TBR auction's should be done in person only. Giant, empty, well-lit warehouse. Lots of water balloons. Every hit is a successful bid :lol:
Develop
(RIP)
rlm said:
[notify]frank[/notify]
Are employees of WHC and it’s subsidiaries prohibited from bidding in TBR?
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
- Topics
- 63
- Posts
- 4,580
- Likes
- 2,592
rlm said:
At this point I think someone's fallen down the rabbit hole and needs help getting out.
I love analyzing financial data and put every domain on my pre-list through the ringer, but I also have a very high ethical nature, almost a fairness line running through my body, which has done me far more harm than good in the business world.
It's not that I feel I'm better or worse than those who stalk - but I just can't do it. The same way I couldn't shoplift as a kid when all my friends were doing it. The same way I give back even the smallest amount of extra change I get at stores or restaurants. I also don't cheat at tests and cannot scam people.
I can also be mean, physically aggressive and insulting, but I don't cheat and I don't stalk.
That's why I get so worked up about all this, as it conflicts with what I intrinsically feel is a fair playing field.
rlm
Bonfire.ca
DomainRecap said:At this point I think someone's fallen down the rabbit hole and needs help getting out.
I love analyzing financial data and put every domain on my pre-list through the ringer, but I also have a very high ethical nature, almost a fairness line running through my body, which has done me far more harm than good in the business world.
It's not that I feel I'm better or worse than those who stalk - but I just can't do it. The same way I couldn't shoplift as a kid when all my friends were doing it. The same way I give back even the smallest amount of extra change I get at stores or restaurants. I also don't cheat at tests and cannot scam people.
I can also be mean, aggressive and insulting, but I don't cheat and I don't stalk.
That's why I get so worked up about all this, as it conflicts with what I intrinsically feel is a fair playing field.
Since you like dredging up past quotes, do you remember this quote?
DomainRecap said:
So you can call what you do as research, but what others do as stalking. So it seems as if the lines are blurred here. Wanting to know that someone legitimately outbid you in a high stakes auction isn't stalking, its transparency and accountability. You're convinced that everyone is going to be collecting massive amounts of data, enough to glean some sort of bidding patterns, and then use it against those bidders. It honestly feels like you're a conspiracy theorist with all the hyperbole. The reality is, the auction end prices are probably more driven by NOT knowing who the end user is. The fear of the unknown is much stronger than of the known.
You say you want a fair playing field, and so do I. The difference is that I'm willing to sacrifice a small level of privacy for the increased transparency and accountability (i.e. a level playing field).
So this is the crux of the argument: You think my accountability concerns are blown way out of proportion. I think your stalking concerns are blown way out of proportion.
But I don't think for you that this is really about a fair playing field. I think this is 100% about you being very private. It's the only explanation that actually fits.
And privacy, as always, is a completely legit concern. But we all sacrifice different levels of privacy every day to make the world run smoothly.
The problem _only_ arises when you twist the argument, sprinkle in too much hyperbole and insults, and it all comes across very conspiracy-theorist like. It really kills the validity of what was a legit viewpoint. This is just meant as constructive feedback for our future arguments
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
- Topics
- 63
- Posts
- 4,580
- Likes
- 2,592
rlm said:
Seriously?
I'm actually laughing at this "incredible connection you've unearthed" . Everyone checks out the odd domain they lost out on, and I'm obviously referring to far more insidious and widespread tactics, such as actively stalking someone constantly and on multiple levels, extracting sensitive data and keeping extensive records of bids, IDs, domains won, weekly budgets, patterns, etc.
That's Creeper Central.
That's why most people don't want static Bidder IDs, as they don't stalk others and don't want to be stalked themselves and I have no desire to give up my privacy to get nothing, as any registrar doing bad things can easily fake how good they are.
Bad registrars will never, ever enact policies to catch themselves.
And just a side note - I've run several tests on various platforms, using higher-than usual proxy bids to test out the various auction systems, and in all but (cough) one, I have won multiple auctions at my original pre-proxy bid. WHC/Siber came through with flying colors, so the "give up privacy to have things run smoothly" makes absolutely no sense to me, as WHC already runs smooth as silk and is totally above-board.
You should be pointing your fingers in another direction.
rlm
Bonfire.ca
DomainRecap said:Seriously?
Just pointing out the hypocrisy. It's OK that you're clearly keeping tabs on whats going on. Just not for anyone else.
DomainRecap said:
I probably collect more domain data than anyone out there. And I'm great at it. But I don't track bids, budgets, patterns as you'd like to think so many people are doing - all over a weekly bunch of reject domains.
That's Paranoia Central. Take off the tinfoil hat.
The fact is, that really isn't useful info in this scenario. It would be a waste of my time and resources trying to predict what any one of a pretty big group of people with their bids, then adjust my bids to try and game it. Its tough enough to focus on setting my own bids on so many domains each week just based on what I think the value is - all for a bunch of chump change domain names. We're not dealing with million dollar properties and paintings at auction here.
If anything, I would more likely bid LESS if I knew who the bidders were. I'm more likely to say, hey, I know that so-in-so would be interested in this domain, it means more to him than it does me, so I'll let him have it. In fact, I bought a lastname domain name in auction today, just to give it away for free to a fellow domainer who I know didn't realize it was in TBR.
DomainRecap said:
Of course not. But there are two types of bad actors, ones at the registrar level, and ones at the employee level. If a registrar incorporates good policies, they can eliminate the employee level problems. And if you're a registrar, why not be a leader, rather than a status quo follower? Prove you're different and better. That's what I'd like to see.
DomainRecap said:
So I should just trust a registrar because you say so? I should trust a registrar forever just because once upon a time they appeared to be trustworthy? I'd put more trust into a registrar if they had public policies, and showed they were following them with some transparency. Pool and Godaddy were both once trusted too, only to find out later that employees were at best, engaging in activities that were a conflict of interest, or at worst, blatantly gaming the system for their or their company's benefit. One of those guys caught red handed is right here on this forum.
DomainRecap said:
I don't disagree. But we know that is pointless. Here, we've got [notify]FM[/notify] paying attention, and so I'm just trying to encourage them to take a position of leadership and transparency. That's at least how I'd handle it if it were my brand on the line.
Then there are guys like me...
I bid on a gut feeling, I don't care who else is bidding on it and if I like the domain enough I keep bidding until the wife takes away the credit card *ROFL*
I bid on a gut feeling, I don't care who else is bidding on it and if I like the domain enough I keep bidding until the wife takes away the credit card *ROFL*
Eby
Verified Member
MapleDots said:
Mine was confiscated by my wife. I called in and claimed it as "lost" *SCRATCH* and got a new card.
Develop said:
I see you probably meant to tag me, I missed it since I'm not "frank" on here.
We should have a policy like this in place next week. You might have noticed that in testing we focussed on great domains like 007notimetodie.ca already to make sure that there we no conflicts. With other bidders that is ;-)
Develop
(RIP)
I look forward to hearing the policy is in place.
Thank you for the info.
Thank you for the info.
FM said:
Sponsors who contribute to keep dn.ca free.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |