New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Motion to ban listing on LEB/LET for providers with private whois
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
While I do support this, it seems to me you can always find this info, even if it is hidden in WHOIS. Or, worse yet, it may make some shady hosts put fake contact info which, aside from being against ICANN rules, is also more misleading/confusing than private WHOIS. I guess what I'm saying is that, like anything, there are pros and cons, but overall this is a good idea.
Agreed!
I completely agree. If you're going to do business on the internet you should at least list your business information...
I'm in favor of using registered company addresses only, no excuses, on WHOIS info if the registrant is a company.
ICANN should put a verification process in place for all TLD's to check that when a domain is registered by a business that the business actually exists. It could easily be implemented by having business registrants state the country/state/locale where the business is registered during the registration process and checking the registration info against company databases. Australia (auDA) already does this verification for .com.au domain registrations by requiring that registrars verify ASIC, ABN, or ATMOSS info (scroll down, requirements are in schedule A http://www.auda.org.au/policies/auda-2012-05/ )
If they're a scammer, scamming is their business, and the domain is disposable, and probably will be disposed of when the current scam gets exposed or is no longer profitable, and they continue the scam using a new domain name. Case in point: 8+ years of Brisbane "Grant" webhosting company domains which all had public WHOIS and were disposed of when the going got hot.
MannDude votes yes on the proposal to ban offers originating from companies with private whois.
If somebody is using obviously fake info just report it somehow.
Otherwise, I agree; privacy protection has no place in the business world.
@DomainBop That's why we went with the EV SSL, have to prove that your whois matches a valid buiness registration. Not sure everyone who sees it knows that, but matters to me. So +1 for registered business. Don't know about elsewhere, but registering as a business in the US takes a few minutes and a few $, that's it.
If you register a .uk domain under a business name as ltd you need to provide the registration number and you can't elect out of public whois. They also check the registration number too.
Would be good if something similar happened with other registries. I'm all for it.
I'm ambivalent about it. if the administrators of this forum want to invoke new rules and bans, go for it. It's your forum.
I'm just not sure what this rule is supposed to achieve. Is it supposed to protect me as a buyer? If so then thanks, but I'd rather make my own decisions about who I buy (or don't buy) from. Private whois is one consideration, but it ranks low on the criteria list.
But if you're going to take this route then you should go a step further: require that every host has a valid "About" page on their website that presents a truthful summary of the company's history, experience, staff and resources. My eyes roll over when I visit a LEB host website and read about "our datacenter", with diesel generators, high-tech security and multi-homed whatevers.
Tell me the truth about yourself -- factually, up front, on your website, in your own words. Then I might buy. Private whois? Oh you should probably turn that off.
I'm behind it.
As a legitimate business, no matter where you are, there is no reason to hide yourself behind invalid whois.
I think providers should not be allowed to list on this site or lowendbox if their whois data is invalid or hidden.
I think this would make the posts of lowendbox and lowendtalk more reparable as fraud/scams would be reduced (mostly children running a company)
@sleddog Good counter argument. I see value in both when put that way. However if scammers ramp up too much in frequency, this forum will be worthless to list offers in and then it'll lose one of its key aspects. I think the offers are kind of the fuel for the fire that is this community, but that's only my POV.
Agreed. But basically we're talking about create a new rule -- a ban -- based on one, atypical, incident. I don't think it's going to contribute a lot to protecting us against scammers. Few of them last past the first year, and the rule is already in place for that. I'm not saying don't do it, I'm saying there's little value in it.
On the other hand, requiring that hosts publish a truthful, honest "About" page will revolutionize the industry
I agree with you that few of them last past the first year, but the impact of those who lasted longer and ultimately disappeared like what happened to Kiloserve is definitely causing far more impact than a summer host, which we can see from the number of threads open on LET and WHT when they disappeared.
How about public whois and a requirement to demonstrate business registration when submitting an ad? I can't think of any good reason someone would balk at submitting business registration if he or she is going to be promoted to the hundreds or thousands of potential customers who hit LEB all the time.
Age doesnt define maturity.
Private whois doesnt define anything.
Stop being sheep you lot
Private whois doesnt define anything.
I agree that age doesn't define maturity but I 100% disagree about private WHOIS.
I can think of a few. For a start, in the UK, self employed persons don't carry a business registration number etc, so how can they provide such details?
My 2c. What if the provider goes back to hidden whois after being advertised on LEB? Or uses fake whois? If some one wants to scam , we can not stop him. We as a community can not control that. It would be much better if we limit LEB to registered business only. At least, this way, we have some kind of government verified whois/information
.
Again, see my comment above.
In an ideal World, I'd agree - however, @Liam and @Chief may not choose that option as it will decrease the amount of hosts that post here. Perhaps another section for registered companies where the posts must be moderated and only registered companies get approved. Just playing with ideas.
Exactly, so no harm to people like you and the people without legal company record should use their whois as one
I'm generally supportive of this idea, though I can think of some exceptions where it may be warranted to keep things secret. In general though, I don't do business with businesses that don't have public whois information.
Yup. Same here. Good point.
@GetKVM_Ash Just a note, how would you verify whois? I understand person might lose domain and blah blah's, but, you are innocent until proven guilty.
What if I create a domain DummyVPS.com with whois info of my neighbor or some random person from an apartment next door or another city? How would you verify my whois? If I want to scam, I would simply create a fake whois (Thanks to google and facebook, it is not rocket science) , fake domain and there you go, a great LEB company with public whois that is not verifiable. Unless LEN decides to send snail mail with signature required on delivery, you can not verify my identity. Because, by any legal mean, LEN can not request GOVT. ID (That also means you need to get PCI compliance
). Registering a business is pretty cheap and easy now a days as well. If you are running a business, might as well make it legit. You do not want to get sued by your client and lose everything you ever made 
.
I never had to verify my company's address, yet they publish it
I don't think you quite understand the legal differences between the two. As a self-employed person, i cant register a LTD business name just to provide a business number, they are two completely separate business formats.
Why should legitimate/smaller self-employed businesses pay the price for scam artists.
Enlighten me.
But we are talking about something where we can hold some one accountable for. Is there anyway you can hold a fake person guilty for something when he doesn't exist?
I am self-employed as a person, not a company. I can run as many company's as i like, under as many names as i like, as long as its my name on any invoices paid to/from me.
As a self employed person in the UK, there is no database to check details against such as the Companies House, nor do i have a registered business number.
So how the hell can i or others (@JHadley for one) prove anything to meet this criteria if it was to come in force