<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: WARNING: Do not check domains at Network Solutions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jlh-design.com/2008/01/warning-do-not-check-domains-at-network-solutions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jlh-design.com/2008/01/warning-do-not-check-domains-at-network-solutions/</link>
	<description>Terrible writing and mere conjecture</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:52:23 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: dockarl</title>
		<link>http://www.jlh-design.com/2008/01/warning-do-not-check-domains-at-network-solutions/#comment-5496</link>
		<dc:creator>dockarl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2008 04:04:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jlh-design.com/2008/01/warning-do-not-check-domains-at-network-solutions/#comment-5496</guid>
		<description>JLH - Google apparently has an answer to this issue - http://news.wired.com/dynamic/stories/W/WEB_ADDRESS_SAMPLING?SITE=WIRE&#38;SECTION=HOME&#38;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&#38;CTIME=2008-01-25-17-24-51

M</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><acronym title="John Honeck">JLH</acronym> - <strong style="color: rgb(0, 0, 255);">G</strong><strong style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">o</strong><strong style="color: rgb(255, 255, 77);">o</strong><strong style="color: rgb(0, 0, 255);">g</strong><strong style="color: rgb(0, 128, 0);">l</strong><strong style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">e</strong> apparently has an answer to this issue - <a href="http://news.wired.com/dynamic/stories/W/WEB_ADDRESS_SAMPLING?SITE=WIRE&amp;SECTION=HOME&amp;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&amp;CTIME=2008-01-25-17-24-51" >http://news.wired.com/dynamic/stories/W/WEB_ADDRESS_SAMPLING?SITE=WIRE&amp;SECTION=HOME&amp;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&amp;CTIME=2008-01-25-17-24-51</a></p>
<p>M</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Honeck "JLH"</title>
		<link>http://www.jlh-design.com/2008/01/warning-do-not-check-domains-at-network-solutions/#comment-5450</link>
		<dc:creator>John Honeck "JLH"</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 00:12:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jlh-design.com/2008/01/warning-do-not-check-domains-at-network-solutions/#comment-5450</guid>
		<description>Forrest, reading the blogsphere the last couple days this case has been pretty well documented well beyond my little corner of the world's scope.  I'd imaging we'll see some sort of backtracking soon from netsol on this soon.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Forrest, reading the blogsphere the last couple days this case has been pretty well documented well beyond my little corner of the world&#8217;s scope.  I&#8217;d imaging we&#8217;ll see some sort of backtracking soon from netsol on this soon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Forrest</title>
		<link>http://www.jlh-design.com/2008/01/warning-do-not-check-domains-at-network-solutions/#comment-5448</link>
		<dc:creator>Forrest</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:29:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jlh-design.com/2008/01/warning-do-not-check-domains-at-network-solutions/#comment-5448</guid>
		<description>I found a site with some really handy AJAX that tests domain names, and a friend warned me this might be possible.  It wasn't the case ... but it's interesting to see that people actually do operate this way.  What a shame.

Reading your post, I was wondering the same thing ... why someone doesn't write a script to change the economics.  I guess we both owe John Mu thanks for answering that one.  ( &lt;i&gt;Plus, I'm sure it would be illegal...&lt;/i&gt; )</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I found a site with some really handy <acronym title="Asynchronous JavaScript and XML">AJAX</acronym> that tests domain names, and a friend warned me this might be possible.  It wasn&#8217;t the case &#8230; but it&#8217;s interesting to see that people actually do operate this way.  What a shame.</p>
<p>Reading your post, I was wondering the same thing &#8230; why someone doesn&#8217;t write a script to change the economics.  I guess we both owe John Mu thanks for answering that one.  ( <i>Plus, I&#8217;m sure it would be illegal&#8230;</i> )</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JohnMu</title>
		<link>http://www.jlh-design.com/2008/01/warning-do-not-check-domains-at-network-solutions/#comment-5441</link>
		<dc:creator>JohnMu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:35:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jlh-design.com/2008/01/warning-do-not-check-domains-at-network-solutions/#comment-5441</guid>
		<description>So much for posting-before-coffee :-) - here are some more links on it:
http://blog.domaintools.com/2008/01/network-solutions-steals-domain-ideas-confirmed/
http://domainnamewire.com/2008/01/08/network-solutions-faces-pr-nightmare-over-domain-frontrunning/
http://www.conceptualist.com/2008/01/08/search-for-domains-at-network-solutions-face-extortion-by-network-solutions/
http://www.elliotsblog.com/index.php/2008/01/08/network-solutions-defensive-measure-for-whois-searches/
http://www.dmueller.com/2008/01/08/domain-names-domains/network-solutions-front-running/
http://www.dotsauce.com/2008/01/08/networksolutions-scandal-hijacking-domain-searches/

[sorry for the delay in posting, the six links got the comment stuck in the spam file]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So much for posting-before-coffee <img src='http://www.jlh-design.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> - here are some more links on it:<br />
<a href="http://blog.domaintools.com/2008/01/network-solutions-steals-domain-ideas-confirmed/" >http://blog.domaintools.com/2008/01/network-solutions-steals-domain-ideas-confirmed/</a><br />
<a href="http://domainnamewire.com/2008/01/08/network-solutions-faces-pr-nightmare-over-domain-frontrunning/" >http://domainnamewire.com/2008/01/08/network-solutions-faces-pr-nightmare-over-domain-frontrunning/</a><br />
<a href="http://www.conceptualist.com/2008/01/08/search-for-domains-at-network-solutions-face-extortion-by-network-solutions/" >http://www.conceptualist.com/2008/01/08/search-for-domains-at-network-solutions-face-extortion-by-network-solutions/</a><br />
<a href="http://www.elliotsblog.com/index.php/2008/01/08/network-solutions-defensive-measure-for-whois-searches/" >http://www.elliotsblog.com/index.php/2008/01/08/network-solutions-defensive-measure-for-whois-searches/</a><br />
<a href="http://www.dmueller.com/2008/01/08/domain-names-domains/network-solutions-front-running/" >http://www.dmueller.com/2008/01/08/domain-names-domains/network-solutions-front-running/</a><br />
<a href="http://www.dotsauce.com/2008/01/08/networksolutions-scandal-hijacking-domain-searches/" >http://www.dotsauce.com/2008/01/08/networksolutions-scandal-hijacking-domain-searches/</a></p>
<p>[sorry for the delay in posting, the six links got the comment stuck in the spam file]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JohnMu</title>
		<link>http://www.jlh-design.com/2008/01/warning-do-not-check-domains-at-network-solutions/#comment-5440</link>
		<dc:creator>JohnMu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jan 2008 06:58:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jlh-design.com/2008/01/warning-do-not-check-domains-at-network-solutions/#comment-5440</guid>
		<description>It's called domain name "tasting": they can register the name and return it after a few days, paying almost nothing. The idea is that if you check a name, it may be a good one for a parking page, so they put up a parking page and see how much income they get that way (from people just entering the name directly into their browsers). If the income is high enough, they will keep the name, paying the normal fee (ok, probably a bit less :-)). 

If you want the name and you know that it isn't something that people would enter into their browsers like that, the best thing you can do is to not access it (and especially not clicking on any ads), wait a few days and then pick it up for the normal price. 

That said, there are plenty of registrars who do not do this questionable practice...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s called domain name &#8220;tasting&#8221;: they can register the name and return it after a few days, paying almost nothing. The idea is that if you check a name, it may be a good one for a parking page, so they put up a parking page and see how much income they get that way (from people just entering the name directly into their browsers). If the income is high enough, they will keep the name, paying the normal fee (ok, probably a bit less :-)). </p>
<p>If you want the name and you know that it isn&#8217;t something that people would enter into their browsers like that, the best thing you can do is to not access it (and especially not clicking on any ads), wait a few days and then pick it up for the normal price. </p>
<p>That said, there are plenty of registrars who do not do this questionable practice&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
