<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Contact ICANN in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19773692</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2009 14:14:37 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2009 14:14:37 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Contact ICANN</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19776742</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/900591"><b>Beth64</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  n2jtx <A HREF="/useremail/u/285788"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Why?  Network Solutions has bought and paid for them.  The fact that every time the monopoly on .com registrations comes up for renewal it automatically gets handed to Network Solutions is a good indication of that.  The best workaround is TO NOT use NSI for domain availability queries but rather one of the other providers.  The question I do not see an answer to is this activity taking place from www.networksolutions.com queries or from www.internic.net queries?  I guess I need to do some testing and see what is up.<br> </div>AFAICT, www.networksolutions.com queries only. <br><small>--<br>Cheers,<br>Elizabeth.<br><br>"Flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." ~Douglas Adams (3/11/1952-5/11/2001 - Rest In Peace, <i>Celestial Hitchhiker.</i>)<br><br></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19776742</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:09:55 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Contact ICANN</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19774924</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : "has bought and paid for them"<br><br>NOT WAY, this is what Bob Parsons of GoDaddy termed domain kiting. They have NO out of pocket fees. Network Solutions and others allow scammers to register a domain and then cancel it within 5 days with no fee (not even the 20 cents to ICANN). They are then allowed to re-register the same name for yet another 5 days, and so the process begins. Free domains with a simple automated register / cancel script.<br><br>I'm all for the 20 cent fee being mandatory at the time of registration. Charging even this 20 cents will make it unprofitable for scammers to keep re-registering these domains.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19774924</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:43:04 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Contact ICANN</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19774153</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1206900"><b>fiberguy</b></A> : I stopped using NetSol for ANYTHING, even looking anything up, since 2002. The funny thing is that I always suspected something like this would EVENTUALLY happen.. I was always afraid to look for domains until I knew it was time to take it.. and to be honest, I'd never use their site to search for anything either - whois or just to see if something was available. <br><br>This company needs to go, and now.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19774153</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 11:18:43 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Contact ICANN</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773797</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/568336"><b>morbo</b></A> : sitefinder didn't clue you into that?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773797</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 10:12:55 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Contact ICANN</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773781</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/486895"><b>newview</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  n2jtx <A HREF="/useremail/u/285788"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Why?<br> </div>Their actions are designed for one purpose, to prevent me from buying domains from a cheaper registrar. You can rest assured I'll NEVER use NetSol for anything.<br><small>--<br> <br>&Ouml;&iquest;&Ouml;<br><A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/525xl">The Rules of Spam</a> | <A HREF="http://www.spamlaws.com/state/md.html">Maryland's <i>Newest</i> Anti-Spam Law</a><br>Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket?</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773781</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 10:09:46 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Contact ICANN</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773722</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/285788"><b>n2jtx</b></A> : Why?  Network Solutions has bought and paid for them.  The fact that every time the monopoly on .com registrations comes up for renewal it automatically gets handed to Network Solutions is a good indication of that.  The best workaround is TO NOT use NSI for domain availability queries but rather one of the other providers.  The question I do not see an answer to is this activity taking place from www.networksolutions.com queries or from www.internic.net queries?  I guess I need to do some testing and see what is up.<br><small>--<br>I support the right to keep and arm bears.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773722</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:59:06 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Contact ICANN</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773705</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/486895"><b>newview</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  AnonProxy <A HREF="/useremail/u/388916"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>that's ok...I'm so mad at this I almost threw my monitor out the window!<br> </div>That's EXACTLY my feeling. NetSol has confirmed they are dirty, greedy bottom-feeding scum suckers with this action.<br><small>--<br> <br>&Ouml;&iquest;&Ouml;<br><A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/525xl">The Rules of Spam</a> | <A HREF="http://www.spamlaws.com/state/md.html">Maryland's <i>Newest</i> Anti-Spam Law</a><br>Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket?</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773705</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:54:13 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Contact ICANN</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773692</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/388916"><b>AnonProxy</b></A> : that's ok...I'm so mad at this I almost threw my monitor out the window!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773692</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:50:37 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Contact ICANN</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773671</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/486895"><b>newview</b></A> : Jeez . . . you're right! <br>What was I thinking? <br><br>:)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773671</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:46:31 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Contact ICANN</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773662</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/388916"><b>AnonProxy</b></A> : I think you mean Internic<br>(If you have questions, comments or complaints about accredited registrars, go to www.internic.net.) ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773662</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:44:29 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Contact ICANN</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773630</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/486895"><b>newview</b></A> : Never Mind . . . ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19773630</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:38:27 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
