Hello Lee,
Saturday, October 21, 2000, 7:07:40 AM, you wrote:
> William,
>> Anyone thinking that they are the only ones to come up with a
>> particular string that is available, when over 900 domains an hour are
>> being processed on average, is just being naive.
> No offence, but you are the one being naive. Sure there are 900 domains
> registered an hour, but there are millions (billions? zillions?) of
> unregistered domains still available. Many of the case will be coincidences,
> but some are not.
Your story is interesting, Lee, but still nothing but accusations
without any proof to tie the registrant to the registrar.
Just because someone is selling the domain doesn't mean they came up
with the domain by watching lookup log files on a registrar site.
I have seen this accusation spread around online as far back as 1996,
and not yet as any party been able to come up with any proof to back
it up.
In the case of this infoworld article, the writer went to great length
to twist innuendoes around to insinuate that insidious things are
going on, but is very very short on evidence, and like most reports of
this type of activity, merely alludes to evidence that might be there,
but doesn't ever get revealed.
I find that to be irresponsible reporting, the kind of thing one would
expect from a tabloid, or maybe Gordon Cook. It is written in an
attempt to create alarm, when no evidence exists to justify the alarm.
And that's exactly the trademark of tabloid reporting.
Now, I've read your stuff before, Lee. And I know you base your
articles on facts and proof. So clearly responsible reporting is
something you are familiar with, and place value on.
Do you really see responsible reporting in this article?
--
Best regards,
William mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
