 | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.general, Kenneth Wright writes:
> > I had an idea that may help save the fibblesnork.com domain name, if it is
> > desired (or possible). The owner is asking $550.00 for the domain name, and
> > LUGNET now has over 1200 members:
> >
> > Why not put a call out for everybody to chip in $0.50 in an effort to help
> > keep our links safe and the fibblesnork name smut free?
> >
> > Maybe put up a PayPal donation button specifically for the cause, to make
> > things even easier. I'm all for putting up a few bucks to cover myself and
> > a few members that may not have checked the current news here on LUGNET.
> >
> > Believe me, I almost didn't post this message because I figured it might be
> > a bit too silly... but heck... I'm 31 and still playing with LEGOs!
>
> It's kind of extortion to pay the 550 though, isn't it? I mean, Todd let it
> lapse for whatever reason, it is true. Would we be encouraging this sort of
> thing by paying? (the person who snagged it was no doubt within their rights
> but it's still not the sort of behaviour I care to reward)
>
> But I don't think you were silly at all to post this. Rather it was quite
> thoughtful and considerate of you to suggest it.
That Is a great Idea but I do have to agree with Larry. $550 for a domain
name? I also think that is alittle too much, dont you? $0.50 cents is really
nothing and will indeed add up if everyone from LUGNET donates, but if Todd
let it go for his reason, why dont we all let it go. Ken-That was very
thoughtful and considerate, and only a handfull of people in this world
today are thoughtful and considerate-nice to see we at LUGNET are a big
fraction of the handfull. Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Plus, it does not say this is for sale for $550 - - it says any bids UNDER
$550 will be ignored. So do not assume it is for sale for $550.
How did this happen anyway? Did Todd just forget to pay to renew?? And if he
DOES own the TM on it (and paid all the fees) then he has some leverage, but
I would be surprised if he did do all that.
Tom
In lugnet.general, Joe Franco writes:
> In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > In lugnet.general, Kenneth Wright writes:
> > > I had an idea that may help save the fibblesnork.com domain name, if it is
> > > desired (or possible). The owner is asking $550.00 for the domain name, and
> > > LUGNET now has over 1200 members:
> > >
> > > Why not put a call out for everybody to chip in $0.50 in an effort to help
> > > keep our links safe and the fibblesnork name smut free?
> > >
> > > Maybe put up a PayPal donation button specifically for the cause, to make
> > > things even easier. I'm all for putting up a few bucks to cover myself and
> > > a few members that may not have checked the current news here on LUGNET.
> > >
> > > Believe me, I almost didn't post this message because I figured it might be
> > > a bit too silly... but heck... I'm 31 and still playing with LEGOs!
> >
> > It's kind of extortion to pay the 550 though, isn't it? I mean, Todd let it
> > lapse for whatever reason, it is true. Would we be encouraging this sort of
> > thing by paying? (the person who snagged it was no doubt within their rights
> > but it's still not the sort of behaviour I care to reward)
> >
> > But I don't think you were silly at all to post this. Rather it was quite
> > thoughtful and considerate of you to suggest it.
>
>
>
>
> That Is a great Idea but I do have to agree with Larry. $550 for a domain
> name? I also think that is alittle too much, dont you? $0.50 cents is really
> nothing and will indeed add up if everyone from LUGNET donates, but if Todd
> let it go for his reason, why dont we all let it go. Ken-That was very
> thoughtful and considerate, and only a handfull of people in this world
> today are thoughtful and considerate-nice to see we at LUGNET are a big
> fraction of the handfull. Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Tom Inosanto writes:
> Plus, it does not say this is for sale for $550 - - it says any bids UNDER
> $550 will be ignored. So do not assume it is for sale for $550.
>
> How did this happen anyway? Did Todd just forget to pay to renew?? And if he
> DOES own the TM on it (and paid all the fees) then he has some leverage, but
> I would be surprised if he did do all that.
Remember when people were saying the domain wouldn't resolve? I checked
whois at the time, and it said the record expired 5-31.
| | | | | | |
