Home > Internet Domains > Wikipedia UPDATE on Domaining and Domainers

Wikipedia UPDATE on Domaining and Domainers

August 1st, 2009

HopeUpdate: Hello again. Last night I uploaded to Wikipedia a comprehensive article on domaining and the domain name industry. I attempted to explain how rich and diverse the industry is, and that the majority of its members were good people doing good things.

My article, which contained abundant resources and links, has been pared down to about 10 or 20% of its original content. However, there is now a good chance that domaining and domainers will no longer be redirected to “cybersquatting”. Below is my letter to Wikipedia admins on their renewed interest in working with me on defining “domaining” and representing more accurately the reputation of those who work in and around the domain name industry. Please help me, if you will, to get the message out.

My Response To Wikipedia Admins & Content Reviewers

I would like to respond with a few comments. I do understand that the number of links I submitted in the Domaining article was excessive. I was trying to provide a picture of the domain industry, and domainers, as a legitimate group who are ethical, well-organized and who do not deserve to be associated with the crime of cybersquatting. While my comments were perceived as “biased” by one Wikipedia commenter, I can only say that his perception is a projection, and a gross overgeneralization which itself cannot be justified.

We all know that cybersquatting exists and is wrong, but if one were to visit the domainer sites and tradeshows, reference our trade associations, and work within the greater industry, then you would see just how unjust it is that the whole domain name industry has been characterized at Wikipedia as cybersquatters or scammers. Ironically, I find those statements to be born of extreme ignorance of our industry and heavily injected with personal bias against all people who invest in domain names for whatever reasons.

I know that what I am sharing here is factual and objective, not merely subjective, but it is hard to prove a negative, i.e. that the majority of domainers don’t engage in cybersquatting. This is why I tried to provide so many links … so that I could provide Wikipedia staff, and eventually their users, with the names and faces of real people, real businesses, and a greater context around our industry that has absolutely nothing to do with cybersquatting.

An example for the reviewers of Wikipedia which will hopefully illustrate my point. Suppose one Wikipedia administrator was convicted of a terrible crime, and by association all wikipedia admins suddenly began being accused of the same terrible crimes and were castigated publicly. For one, we know that you are not responsible for the bad acts of another person, and ultimately his poor choices do not reflect on you personally or negate all of the good will and collective hard work done at Wikipedia. This parallels the damage that was being done by redirecting domaining and domainers to cybersquatting. The bad acts of a relative minority were being used to humiliate and disparage a large group of people who have worked ethically and responsibly for years, and always within the law and within their rights of domain name registration.

Thank you for being willing to work with me on this important subject. Domainers, as a large group, are basically investors, internet enthusiasts, and people who have careers in a variety of fields. They are reasonable people with families, the same hopes and dreams as everyone else. And moreover, have notable achievements in life. The extensive list of domainers I provided to you, and their associated websites (in my original submission), are a small representative sample of the quality of individuals involved in the domain name industry. One of my investment partners is a licensed psychiatrist working everyday to help people with mental health disorders. Another of my domainer friends heads a non-profit fund raising organization. Yet another is a professor of economics at a major university. Many of my peers are attorneys, stay at home moms, realtors, high-level techies, college students, you name it. This diverse group of people interested in domaining are everyday people with intact values and a guiding set of principles that govern their choices in life. And they have specifically avoided internet crimes and cybersquatting. I know this on a personal level which is why I was so incensed and outraged that a couple of Wikipedia admins took it upon themselves to publicly denigrate so many reputable people.

Thanks again for considering these comments, and for allowing me a voice on this critical issue.

Addendum: Another reason I included so many industry links is I want the Domaining page to be an actual resource for anyone who searches on domaining and is interested in learning more about it. The links I provided you are high quality, relevant, and central to understanding the domain name industry. Please consider allowing me to perhaps place the links at the bottom of the article such that Wikipedia users will have a great resource guide for learning.

Internet Domains , ,

  1. Martin
    August 7th, 2009 at 20:15 | #1

    I don’t really agree with what you write about domaining. I think sitting on a needed business asset without creating any additional value at all is not a legitimate business practice. I think it would be best if selling and leasing of domain names would be declared a crime if not done by an official accredited domain registry.

    I think the practice of sitting on a domain and then expecting to get a share of the value that somebody else might create with that domain is inappropriate. Further i think comparing it to real estate or stock trading is also a faulty comparison. In stock trading value is created by providing capital to companies. In real estate value is created by keeping the property intact or further developing it. In real estate value is also created by introducing properties to the market and thus creating a place where properties can be sold in the first place (without real estate agents it would be very laborious to find a good property).

    With domains none of this is the case. You don’t create any value in any way at all!!! I would be supportive of the idea to use the word “domain squatting” for all forms of domain holding that have the only intention of selling the domain at a higher price without offering additional value. If somebody does not put a domain to use he or she should not be allowed to buy it in the first place. The easiest kind of rule i can think of would be to make any form of domain sale or leasing illegal unless performed by an accredited domain registrar.

    I really don’t see how you can call something that is not creating any value at all an industry? You might as well call hijacking planes an industry. Sure there is money to be made in this, but has any value been created? I don’t see much of a difference in kidnapping and so called ‘domaining’. Would love to hear your thoughts on this…

    P.S. Even though I am not really supportive of the entire underlying concept of domaining, I have to say your block has some pretty good articles.

  2. August 7th, 2009 at 20:40 | #2

    Martin – Your statements contain numerous inaccurate conclusions. I am hesitant to post your comment because it would require a plethora of rebuttal and corrective clarifications on my part in order to educate you on what domaining is.

    I would advise you to read Ron Jackson’s most recent DN Journal newsletter. It contains my basic primer on the domaining industry. If you read it thoroughly and visit the domainer websites I listed there, your only conclusion will be that you have been carrying a ton of misinformation about domaining and domain investors. Domainers bring incredible value to their domain properties through full scale development and many other content building approaches.

    Sorry, I just don’t have time to detail every statement you made. Thank you for visiting though.

  1. August 1st, 2009 at 10:41 | #1
Comments are closed.