Banned for Bogus whois

[MrYum]

Originally Posted by tigermom

Hmmmm and you are the "majority of us" now? This is a board and people are entitled to express their opinions without getting sarcastic remarks.

To the owners of this board - this is the kind of posting that drive people away. If members show no respect to opinions expressed by others, what's the point of having any discussion?

Now, UW, am I to understand that you reject sites at Scorpiolinks based on private Whois? if so kindly let us know and mention it in your rules. Will save us both time

Well, UW certainly represents a pretty good cross section of link list owners views as he's been reviewing sites for quite some time. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinions, and to express those opinions. HOWEVER, don't be surprised when those that have been around a while point out that a subject has been hashed and re-hashed and RE-HASHED AGAIN...at length. Board search is indeed a wonderful thing.

As to driving people away, that's entirely possible...and they were people that needed to be driven away too

Sorry Tigermom...you're doing to need a bit thicker skin if his post offended you that much.

Back to the subject at hand...yes, I do indeed decline sites based on private or bogus whois information. As Greenie himself so eloquently put it (paraphrasing here...too lazy to grab the text), "Would you do business in the offline world with someone who didn't want you to have any of their information?" and "This is a business and should be treated as such".

That said, I have been known to make exceptions...many reviewers will not...period! I specifically didn't check a recent new submitter because he was recommended by someone I respect. I did indeed check your whois Tigermom and chose to ignore the issue since you appeared to be genuine and trying hard. Again, there are many that do not make exceptions and I certainly understand why...as I'm getting closer and closer to that myself.

You have NO idea the stuff we review every day. Not whining...it goes with the turf. But, there are reasons we do the checks we do on submitters...and no, I won't specifically go into what those checks are...that would make it too easy for the scammers. YES, the scammers DO make it harder for everyone...NO, it's not fair! Welcome to the world of the adult internet...it IS the way it IS...and we deal with things as best we can...that's the truth.

Frankly, if you're in a position in life that you cannot have real information in your whois...perhaps a re-think of being involved with adult entertainment might be warranted. Or, at the very least...steering clear of the exposure of free sites/link lists. I mention link lists because most (myself included) will not trade links with whois protected domains.

Myself, I look in the mirror every morning with a smile. I'm proud of what I do and hide it from no one...online or off. If they can't deal with it...that's their problem. Whoever decided sex and adult entertainment were bad things was a fucktard.

[Surfn]

Originally Posted by MrYum

Well, UW certainly represents a pretty good cross section of link list owners views as he's been reviewing sites for quite some time. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinions, and to express those opinions. HOWEVER, don't be surprised when those that have been around a while point out that a subject has been hashed and re-hashed and RE-HASHED AGAIN...at length. Board search is indeed a wonderful thing.

As to driving people away, that's entirely possible...and they were people that needed to be driven away too

Sorry Tigermom...you're doing to need a bit thicker skin if his post offended you that much.

Back to the subject at hand...yes, I do indeed decline sites based on private or bogus whois information. As Greenie himself so eloquently put it (paraphrasing here...too lazy to grab the text), "Would you do business in the offline world with someone who didn't want you to have any of their information?" and "This is a business and should be treated as such".

That said, I have been known to make exceptions...many reviewers will not...period! I specifically didn't check a recent new submitter because he was recommended by someone I respect. I did indeed check your whois Tigermom and chose to ignore the issue since you appeared to be genuine and trying hard. Again, there are many that do not make exceptions and I certainly understand why...as I'm getting closer and closer to that myself.

You have NO idea the stuff we review every day. Not whining...it goes with the turf. But, there are reasons we do the checks we do on submitters...and no, I won't specifically go into what those checks are...that would make it too easy for the scammers. YES, the scammers DO make it harder for everyone...NO, it's not fair! Welcome to the world of the adult internet...it IS the way it IS...and we deal with things as best we can...that's the truth.

Frankly, if you're in a position in life that you cannot have real information in your whois...perhaps a re-think of being involved with adult entertainment might be warranted. Or, at the very least...steering clear of the exposure of free sites/link lists. I mention link lists because most (myself included) will not trade links with whois protected domains.

Myself, I look in the mirror every morning with a smile. I'm proud of what I do and hide it from no one...online or off. If they can't deal with it...that's their problem. Whoever decided sex and adult entertainment were bad things was a fucktard.

That pretty much sums it up here too

[tigermom]

Originally Posted by MrYum

Well, UW certainly represents a pretty good cross section of link list owners views as he's been reviewing sites for quite some time. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinions, and to express those opinions. HOWEVER, don't be surprised when those that have been around a while point out that a subject has been hashed and re-hashed and RE-HASHED AGAIN...at length. Board search is indeed a wonderful thing.

I get that, that's not the issue. The issue I had was with "I guess it's a good thing that the majority of us don't personally care about what you frown upon." Not with the majority of LL's agreeing to the no private WhoIs rule. I didn't like the style, the content I actually aprreciated.

[Toby]

Originally Posted by tigermom

...I didn't like the style, the content I actually aprreciated.

UW simply calls a spade a spade, and his "style" can take a little getting used to. My Grandfather was much the same, so it didn't take any adjustment for me. Far too often such brutal honesty is necessary to drive a point home.