Some time ago I saw this ( http://www.web-dns.co.uk/ ) free DNS
service mentioned.  Recently, it appears that some link has been
established between the site and CheapNames.com (if you set the
DNS to use the ns1.nsnoc.com / ns2.nsnoc.com servers but have
not yet added the domain to an account, there's a holding page
from CheapNames.com shown).  

It seems a bit more than a coincidence that some domains which I
had registered and which expired have now been registered by ZusCom
(with various contact mail addresses on GMail) and the same firm has
registered CheapNames.com

In my case, none of the domains was really important, though some
friends are a bit puzzled that  <surname>family.info  was grabbed
by ZusCom  (and on enquiry, they have no plans to auction this
domain).  I suppose they might be filled with links to existing
web sites to improve the incoming 'page links' counts for some
other sites, and with GoDaddy charging only $1.22 they can afford
to buy dozens of domains very cheaply at present.

Has anyone else seen domains "snapped up" by ZusCom ?
Any other comments ?

"NoNeedToKnow" <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote in message 
news:8hpu439hel6849qaifn2914avhqd75nhbm@complete-pc-services.info...
> Some time ago I saw this ( http://www.web-dns.co.uk/ ) free DNS
> service mentioned.  Recently, it appears that some link has been
> established between the site and CheapNames.com (if you set the
> DNS to use the ns1.nsnoc.com / ns2.nsnoc.com servers but have
> not yet added the domain to an account, there's a holding page
> from CheapNames.com shown).
>
> It seems a bit more than a coincidence that some domains which I
> had registered and which expired have now been registered by ZusCom
> (with various contact mail addresses on GMail) and the same firm has
> registered CheapNames.com
>
> In my case, none of the domains was really important, though some
> friends are a bit puzzled that  <surname>family.info  was grabbed
> by ZusCom  (and on enquiry, they have no plans to auction this
> domain).  I suppose they might be filled with links to existing
> web sites to improve the incoming 'page links' counts for some
> other sites, and with GoDaddy charging only $1.22 they can afford
> to buy dozens of domains very cheaply at present.
>
> Has anyone else seen domains "snapped up" by ZusCom ?
> Any other comments ?

I don't know about that company, but when gtld domains expire through us we 
renew them for a month and stick ads on them. If the customer does not renew 
them we drop them into redemption or hang onto them if they are bringing in 
enough ad revenue to be worthwhile. If we keep them on the the original 
customr can get them back for the redemption fee.

Are they doing something similar?

It might be that these people have not really lost their domain names.

We had a big increase in oru renewal rate after doing this because it 
reminded people who they had registered through and they were able to 
contact us when they saw the ads.


-- 
Gordon Hudson || Hostroute.com Ltd
e-mail:ghudson [at] hostroute.net
http://www.hostroute.co.uk/resellers Host 5 web sites for £9 per month
http://www.nameroute.co.uk/ Domain Names with free hosting and email
http://www.myqth.co.uk/ 3000MB of web space for £29 per year

> service mentioned.  Recently, it appears that some link has been
> established between the site and CheapNames.com

Thats not true, there's no link between the two.

> DNS to use the ns1.nsnoc.com / ns2.nsnoc.com servers but have
> not yet added the domain to an account, there's a holding page
> from CheapNames.com shown).

Please demonstrate that, it's not something that I've ever seen and 
certainly not something that's been set to happen by default.

-- 

Regards

John Lyons

www.discountadsl.co.uk ADSL £9.99
Netserve Consultants Ltd
T: 0845 6444194   F: 01745 582374
w: www.netserve.co.uk   e: support@nsnoc.com
http://nsnoc.blogspot.com for service status

On  21 May 2007,  "John Lyons"  wrote:

>Please demonstrate that, it's not something that I've ever seen and 
>certainly not something that's been set to happen by default.

I will see if I can find the specific domain - I'm grateful of the assurance
it isn't being done deliberately.   Incidentally, is there any (easy) way to
change the colour of the text on the web pages - it looks like light grey
text on white background, and I'd love to see a bit more contrast :)

On Mon, 21 May 2007 12:37:26 +0100, in article
,
NoNeedToKnow <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote:

[snip]

>Any other comments ?

Aren't you the chap who once wrote

> Say what you will, but consider doing it without "hiding" behind
> some anonymous mail address and Deja news next time... at least
> I can put my name to my comments without fear !!

Hmm ?  ;-)

-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article <4655f621$0$20193$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>,
Dave  wrote:

> Aren't you the chap who once wrote

Yes, it quite possibly is, but the point you are trying to make is not
really relevant.  Usenet has changed a lot since then and he (like you!)
clearly prefers to be a bit more anonymous these days.

-- 
Bob Cox.  Stoke Gifford, near Bristol, UK.
http://pippin.co.uk/

On  24 May 2007, Dave  wrote:

> On Mon, 21 May 2007 12:37, in article
> ,
> NoNeedToKnow <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Any other comments ?
>
>Aren't you the chap who once wrote
>
>> Say what you will, but consider doing it without "hiding" behind
>> some anonymous mail address and Deja news next time... at least
>> I can put my name to my comments without fear !!
>
>Hmm ?  ;-)

Hmmm... back at you  :-)  I see you, like me, use a GMail account, and
while you put "Dave", I put "NoNeedToKnow" which is perhaps easier to
identify than one of thousands of "Dave"s (none of whom is guaranteed to 
use the name Dave in RL, of course, just as someone posting elsewhere with 
a pseudonym of Stan actually has a different forename in RL).  Not sure 
how long ago that post might be, nor whether it was me that wrote it, 
still, it is a little academic, and as Bob has indicated, times change...

Has been quite a while since DejaNews was known as that, so that post,
and whoever wrote it, is history, anyway.

"NoNeedToKnow" <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote in message 
news:8hpu439hel6849qaifn2914avhqd75nhbm@complete-pc-services.info...
> Some time ago I saw this ( http://www.web-dns.co.uk/ ) free DNS
> service mentioned.  Recently, it appears that some link has been
> established between the site and CheapNames.com (if you set the
> DNS to use the ns1.nsnoc.com / ns2.nsnoc.com servers but have
> not yet added the domain to an account, there's a holding page
> from CheapNames.com shown).
>
> It seems a bit more than a coincidence that some domains which I
> had registered and which expired have now been registered by ZusCom
> (with various contact mail addresses on GMail) and the same firm has
> registered CheapNames.com
>
> In my case, none of the domains was really important, though some
> friends are a bit puzzled that  <surname>family.info  was grabbed
> by ZusCom  (and on enquiry, they have no plans to auction this
> domain).  I suppose they might be filled with links to existing
> web sites to improve the incoming 'page links' counts for some
> other sites, and with GoDaddy charging only $1.22 they can afford
> to buy dozens of domains very cheaply at present.
>
> Has anyone else seen domains "snapped up" by ZusCom ?
> Any other comments ?

I don't know about that company, but when gtld domains expire through us we 
renew them for a month and stick ads on them. If the customer does not renew 
them we drop them into redemption or hang onto them if they are bringing in 
enough ad revenue to be worthwhile. If we keep them on the the original 
customr can get them back for the redemption fee.

Are they doing something similar?

It might be that these people have not really lost their domain names.

We had a big increase in oru renewal rate after doing this because it 
reminded people who they had registered through and they were able to 
contact us when they saw the ads.


-- 
Gordon Hudson || Hostroute.com Ltd
e-mail:ghudson [at] hostroute.net
http://www.hostroute.co.uk/resellers Host 5 web sites for £9 per month
http://www.nameroute.co.uk/ Domain Names with free hosting and email
http://www.myqth.co.uk/ 3000MB of web space for £29 per year

> service mentioned.  Recently, it appears that some link has been
> established between the site and CheapNames.com

Thats not true, there's no link between the two.

> DNS to use the ns1.nsnoc.com / ns2.nsnoc.com servers but have
> not yet added the domain to an account, there's a holding page
> from CheapNames.com shown).

Please demonstrate that, it's not something that I've ever seen and 
certainly not something that's been set to happen by default.

-- 

Regards

John Lyons

www.discountadsl.co.uk ADSL £9.99
Netserve Consultants Ltd
T: 0845 6444194   F: 01745 582374
w: www.netserve.co.uk   e: support@nsnoc.com
http://nsnoc.blogspot.com for service status

On  21 May 2007,  "John Lyons"  wrote:

>Please demonstrate that, it's not something that I've ever seen and 
>certainly not something that's been set to happen by default.

I will see if I can find the specific domain - I'm grateful of the assurance
it isn't being done deliberately.   Incidentally, is there any (easy) way to
change the colour of the text on the web pages - it looks like light grey
text on white background, and I'd love to see a bit more contrast :)

On Mon, 21 May 2007 12:37:26 +0100, in article
,
NoNeedToKnow <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote:

[snip]

>Any other comments ?

Aren't you the chap who once wrote

> Say what you will, but consider doing it without "hiding" behind
> some anonymous mail address and Deja news next time... at least
> I can put my name to my comments without fear !!

Hmm ?  ;-)

-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article <4655f621$0$20193$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>,
Dave  wrote:

> Aren't you the chap who once wrote

Yes, it quite possibly is, but the point you are trying to make is not
really relevant.  Usenet has changed a lot since then and he (like you!)
clearly prefers to be a bit more anonymous these days.

-- 
Bob Cox.  Stoke Gifford, near Bristol, UK.
http://pippin.co.uk/

On  24 May 2007, Dave  wrote:

> On Mon, 21 May 2007 12:37, in article
> ,
> NoNeedToKnow <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Any other comments ?
>
>Aren't you the chap who once wrote
>
>> Say what you will, but consider doing it without "hiding" behind
>> some anonymous mail address and Deja news next time... at least
>> I can put my name to my comments without fear !!
>
>Hmm ?  ;-)

Hmmm... back at you  :-)  I see you, like me, use a GMail account, and
while you put "Dave", I put "NoNeedToKnow" which is perhaps easier to
identify than one of thousands of "Dave"s (none of whom is guaranteed to 
use the name Dave in RL, of course, just as someone posting elsewhere with 
a pseudonym of Stan actually has a different forename in RL).  Not sure 
how long ago that post might be, nor whether it was me that wrote it, 
still, it is a little academic, and as Bob has indicated, times change...

Has been quite a while since DejaNews was known as that, so that post,
and whoever wrote it, is history, anyway.

"NoNeedToKnow" <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote in message 
news:8hpu439hel6849qaifn2914avhqd75nhbm@complete-pc-services.info...
> Some time ago I saw this ( http://www.web-dns.co.uk/ ) free DNS
> service mentioned.  Recently, it appears that some link has been
> established between the site and CheapNames.com (if you set the
> DNS to use the ns1.nsnoc.com / ns2.nsnoc.com servers but have
> not yet added the domain to an account, there's a holding page
> from CheapNames.com shown).
>
> It seems a bit more than a coincidence that some domains which I
> had registered and which expired have now been registered by ZusCom
> (with various contact mail addresses on GMail) and the same firm has
> registered CheapNames.com
>
> In my case, none of the domains was really important, though some
> friends are a bit puzzled that  <surname>family.info  was grabbed
> by ZusCom  (and on enquiry, they have no plans to auction this
> domain).  I suppose they might be filled with links to existing
> web sites to improve the incoming 'page links' counts for some
> other sites, and with GoDaddy charging only $1.22 they can afford
> to buy dozens of domains very cheaply at present.
>
> Has anyone else seen domains "snapped up" by ZusCom ?
> Any other comments ?

I don't know about that company, but when gtld domains expire through us we 
renew them for a month and stick ads on them. If the customer does not renew 
them we drop them into redemption or hang onto them if they are bringing in 
enough ad revenue to be worthwhile. If we keep them on the the original 
customr can get them back for the redemption fee.

Are they doing something similar?

It might be that these people have not really lost their domain names.

We had a big increase in oru renewal rate after doing this because it 
reminded people who they had registered through and they were able to 
contact us when they saw the ads.


-- 
Gordon Hudson || Hostroute.com Ltd
e-mail:ghudson [at] hostroute.net
http://www.hostroute.co.uk/resellers Host 5 web sites for £9 per month
http://www.nameroute.co.uk/ Domain Names with free hosting and email
http://www.myqth.co.uk/ 3000MB of web space for £29 per year

> service mentioned.  Recently, it appears that some link has been
> established between the site and CheapNames.com

Thats not true, there's no link between the two.

> DNS to use the ns1.nsnoc.com / ns2.nsnoc.com servers but have
> not yet added the domain to an account, there's a holding page
> from CheapNames.com shown).

Please demonstrate that, it's not something that I've ever seen and 
certainly not something that's been set to happen by default.

-- 

Regards

John Lyons

www.discountadsl.co.uk ADSL £9.99
Netserve Consultants Ltd
T: 0845 6444194   F: 01745 582374
w: www.netserve.co.uk   e: support@nsnoc.com
http://nsnoc.blogspot.com for service status

On  21 May 2007,  "John Lyons"  wrote:

>Please demonstrate that, it's not something that I've ever seen and 
>certainly not something that's been set to happen by default.

I will see if I can find the specific domain - I'm grateful of the assurance
it isn't being done deliberately.   Incidentally, is there any (easy) way to
change the colour of the text on the web pages - it looks like light grey
text on white background, and I'd love to see a bit more contrast :)

On Mon, 21 May 2007 12:37:26 +0100, in article
,
NoNeedToKnow <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote:

[snip]

>Any other comments ?

Aren't you the chap who once wrote

> Say what you will, but consider doing it without "hiding" behind
> some anonymous mail address and Deja news next time... at least
> I can put my name to my comments without fear !!

Hmm ?  ;-)

-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article <4655f621$0$20193$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>,
Dave  wrote:

> Aren't you the chap who once wrote

Yes, it quite possibly is, but the point you are trying to make is not
really relevant.  Usenet has changed a lot since then and he (like you!)
clearly prefers to be a bit more anonymous these days.

-- 
Bob Cox.  Stoke Gifford, near Bristol, UK.
http://pippin.co.uk/

On  24 May 2007, Dave  wrote:

> On Mon, 21 May 2007 12:37, in article
> ,
> NoNeedToKnow <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Any other comments ?
>
>Aren't you the chap who once wrote
>
>> Say what you will, but consider doing it without "hiding" behind
>> some anonymous mail address and Deja news next time... at least
>> I can put my name to my comments without fear !!
>
>Hmm ?  ;-)

Hmmm... back at you  :-)  I see you, like me, use a GMail account, and
while you put "Dave", I put "NoNeedToKnow" which is perhaps easier to
identify than one of thousands of "Dave"s (none of whom is guaranteed to 
use the name Dave in RL, of course, just as someone posting elsewhere with 
a pseudonym of Stan actually has a different forename in RL).  Not sure 
how long ago that post might be, nor whether it was me that wrote it, 
still, it is a little academic, and as Bob has indicated, times change...

Has been quite a while since DejaNews was known as that, so that post,
and whoever wrote it, is history, anyway.

On  21 May 2007,  "John Lyons"  wrote:

>Please demonstrate that, it's not something that I've ever seen and 
>certainly not something that's been set to happen by default.

I will see if I can find the specific domain - I'm grateful of the assurance
it isn't being done deliberately.   Incidentally, is there any (easy) way to
change the colour of the text on the web pages - it looks like light grey
text on white background, and I'd love to see a bit more contrast :)

On Mon, 21 May 2007 12:37:26 +0100, in article
,
NoNeedToKnow <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote:

[snip]

>Any other comments ?

Aren't you the chap who once wrote

> Say what you will, but consider doing it without "hiding" behind
> some anonymous mail address and Deja news next time... at least
> I can put my name to my comments without fear !!

Hmm ?  ;-)

-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article <4655f621$0$20193$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>,
Dave  wrote:

> Aren't you the chap who once wrote

Yes, it quite possibly is, but the point you are trying to make is not
really relevant.  Usenet has changed a lot since then and he (like you!)
clearly prefers to be a bit more anonymous these days.

-- 
Bob Cox.  Stoke Gifford, near Bristol, UK.
http://pippin.co.uk/

On  24 May 2007, Dave  wrote:

> On Mon, 21 May 2007 12:37, in article
> ,
> NoNeedToKnow <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Any other comments ?
>
>Aren't you the chap who once wrote
>
>> Say what you will, but consider doing it without "hiding" behind
>> some anonymous mail address and Deja news next time... at least
>> I can put my name to my comments without fear !!
>
>Hmm ?  ;-)

Hmmm... back at you  :-)  I see you, like me, use a GMail account, and
while you put "Dave", I put "NoNeedToKnow" which is perhaps easier to
identify than one of thousands of "Dave"s (none of whom is guaranteed to 
use the name Dave in RL, of course, just as someone posting elsewhere with 
a pseudonym of Stan actually has a different forename in RL).  Not sure 
how long ago that post might be, nor whether it was me that wrote it, 
still, it is a little academic, and as Bob has indicated, times change...

Has been quite a while since DejaNews was known as that, so that post,
and whoever wrote it, is history, anyway.

On Mon, 21 May 2007 12:37:26 +0100, in article
,
NoNeedToKnow <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote:

[snip]

>Any other comments ?

Aren't you the chap who once wrote

> Say what you will, but consider doing it without "hiding" behind
> some anonymous mail address and Deja news next time... at least
> I can put my name to my comments without fear !!

Hmm ?  ;-)

-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article <4655f621$0$20193$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>,
Dave  wrote:

> Aren't you the chap who once wrote

Yes, it quite possibly is, but the point you are trying to make is not
really relevant.  Usenet has changed a lot since then and he (like you!)
clearly prefers to be a bit more anonymous these days.

-- 
Bob Cox.  Stoke Gifford, near Bristol, UK.
http://pippin.co.uk/

On  24 May 2007, Dave  wrote:

> On Mon, 21 May 2007 12:37, in article
> ,
> NoNeedToKnow <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Any other comments ?
>
>Aren't you the chap who once wrote
>
>> Say what you will, but consider doing it without "hiding" behind
>> some anonymous mail address and Deja news next time... at least
>> I can put my name to my comments without fear !!
>
>Hmm ?  ;-)

Hmmm... back at you  :-)  I see you, like me, use a GMail account, and
while you put "Dave", I put "NoNeedToKnow" which is perhaps easier to
identify than one of thousands of "Dave"s (none of whom is guaranteed to 
use the name Dave in RL, of course, just as someone posting elsewhere with 
a pseudonym of Stan actually has a different forename in RL).  Not sure 
how long ago that post might be, nor whether it was me that wrote it, 
still, it is a little academic, and as Bob has indicated, times change...

Has been quite a while since DejaNews was known as that, so that post,
and whoever wrote it, is history, anyway.