User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:34:46 PM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you'll remove your hood for a moment, you might be surprised to learn that Obama has left the building. That kinda blows a hole in your ICANN = fedgov bs argument. A private entity's behavior has precisely nothing to do with the 1st Amendment. Two centuries ago it was the town square, the pulpit, myriad small newsheets. Not comparable to what we have today, but anyone could get their message out, and the bar was low. The 1st Amendment forbade Government interference. Now: Google, Facebook, etc. THESE are now the public square. If you are denied access, you don't exist. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:35:46 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So far, we haven't seen evidence of that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: but when icann gets involved to stop it from finding a new home that is bs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:36:34 PM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They bailed and sounded like their party invitations had cratered. Too much for them.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:37:51 PM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's amazing just how left this site has gone - look at the comments in this thread. Freedom of speech is lost in this country and many here applaud it if it doesn't fit their own beliefs. It's amazing how many of you trash the rights of others. What other country in the world could you have the freedom to even have a site like stormfront? Think about that for a second. Mark my words, this site will too be taken down if the left keeps having their way. You all think it's funny, and while the enemy is fighting an active war youre all pointing and laughing at the casualties. History is full of dead people who took the left for a joke and stood around and laughed until they were up to bat. Its like sitting around watching your neighborhood burn around you while you laugh at your neighbors. Even those neighbors you don't agree with or think are crazy, and while you laugh that fire comes closer and closer to you..... We better start deciding what hill we want to start our battles on cause it's not stopping at the flag, monuments, web sites and being white or a cop. ARFCOM is starting to be a polished DU sometimes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:43:13 PM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Seven pages of excellence that haven't failed to deliver. The socialists, statists, commies, underground racists, holier-than-thou-let-ME-teach-you-what-the-1st-Amendment-means crowd have their panties all tied up in a wet knot for sure.  . But it's been seriously interesting to see who takes what position.Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1st amendment doesn't set well with some folks around here, unless they agree with you. This'll be good.  . But it's been seriously interesting to see who takes what position. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:44:52 PM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's amazing just how left this site has gone - look at the comments in this thread. Freedom of speech is lost in this country and many here applaud it if it doesn't fit their own beliefs. It's amazing how many of you trash the rights of others. What other country in the world could you have the freedom to even have a site like stormfront? Think about that for a second. Mark my words, this site will too be taken down if the left keeps having their way. You all think it's funny, and while the enemy is fighting an active war youre all pointing and laughing at the casualties. History is full of dead people who took the left for a joke and stood around and laughed until they were up to bat. Its like sitting around watching your neighborhood burn around you while you laugh at your neighbors. Even those neighbors you don't agree with or think are crazy, and while you laugh that fire comes closer and closer to you..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:49:04 PM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Monday. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How long does AR15.com have left? Seriously? Given this environment, a non-PC, Pro-2A website does not a chance. You know, for my farewell salute to the site. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:51:06 PM EST
[#8]
Should Alphabet (Google) and Facebook be broken up like AT&T and make room for competition and opposing viewpoints?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:51:34 PM EST
[#9]
Imagine if the phone company cut off service to your house because you are a Trump supporter.
This is no different. Right now they are going for the low-hanging fruit (IE the couple dozen goofballs on Stormfront) but that will quickly change. The fact that almost all Internet access in this country is through just 2-3 companies makes it especially dangerous. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:52:05 PM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Should Alphabet (Google) and Facebook be broken up like AT&T and make room for competition and opposing viewpoints? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:55:02 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Imagine if the phone company cut off service to your house because you are a Trump supporter. This is no different. Right now they are going for the low-hanging fruit (IE the couple dozen goofballs on Stormfront) but that will quickly change. The fact that almost all Internet access in this country is through just 2-3 companies makes it especially dangerous. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:56:00 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"DU got hacked, ha ha good riddance!" "Stormfront got shut down by their service provider, it's an outrage" Drawing a false equivalence between the two is disingenuous at best in my opinion. Being disgusted by pc censorship is in no way similar to laughing at poor site protection/maintenance. The left think black rifles are evil...it won't be a happy day when this site gets vaporized. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:56:48 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You sir are on the money, sad how just in the 4+ years I have been here I see the SJW, Never Trumper's (site staff even) and others saying Good! Fuck Em, etc., same with the Conferate Flag issue, no one cared it seemed, edgy I guess. We better start deciding what hill we want to start our battles on cause it's not stopping at the flag, monuments, web sites and being white or a cop. ARFCOM is starting to be a polished DU sometimes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 12:58:39 PM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What would happen if your power company (the only one you can get service from) decided you shouldn't have power anymore? According to the National Consumer Law Center: Basically, utilities are governed by a different set of rules. They are not allowed to refuse service without good cause. We're at a point where the internet is a utility and a mainstream commerce platform. I'm not sure if the laws have caught up or not but denying a company hosting service because you don't like their content is a very slippery slope. I'm thinking this particular scenario is going to end one of two ways; the hosting services will relent under legal pressure or this will go to SCOTUS like Hustler VS Falwell. It's a bit cloudy as to whether this falls under federal, state or local jurisdiction but the laws seem pretty consistent across the board. More info on the subject: http://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4595&context=law_lawreview https://www.puc.texas.gov/consumer/complaint/Rights.aspx http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-utility-company-shut-off-service-because-my-bankruptcy-filing.html https://www.psc.state.ms.us/executive/pdfs/2012/Service%20Rules.pdf ETA: Looks like this is getting a lot of discussion in legal circles as well: https://verdict.justia.com/2017/08/23/free-speech-issues-raised-internet-companies-denying-service-neo-nazi-sites Unless comcast et al decide to cut off your access to stormfront, this is a non issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:02:52 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Imagine if the phone company cut off service to your house because you are a Trump supporter. This is no different. Right now they are going for the low-hanging fruit (IE the couple dozen goofballs on Stormfront) but that will quickly change. The fact that almost all Internet access in this country is through just 2-3 companies makes it especially dangerous. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:05:02 PM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Watching hapless tards get hacked is very different from seeing a provider flush a site completely. Drawing a false equivalence between the two is disingenuous at best in my opinion. Being disgusted by pc censorship is in no way similar to laughing at poor site protection/maintenance. The left think black rifles are evil...it won't be a happy day when this site gets vaporized. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
"DU got hacked, ha ha good riddance!" "Stormfront got shut down by their service provider, it's an outrage" Drawing a false equivalence between the two is disingenuous at best in my opinion. Being disgusted by pc censorship is in no way similar to laughing at poor site protection/maintenance. The left think black rifles are evil...it won't be a happy day when this site gets vaporized. when it happens to ARFCOM he will cry |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:05:12 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How can the internet not be considered a utility? But not access to one site. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:06:12 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Watching hapless tards get hacked is very different from seeing a provider flush a site completely. Drawing a false equivalence between the two is disingenuous at best in my opinion. Being disgusted by pc censorship is in no way similar to laughing at poor site protection/maintenance. The left think black rifles are evil...it won't be a happy day when this site gets vaporized. 2-the point is Stormfront is somehow perceived as "better" than DU and other scumbags. People were posting about throwing liberals out of helicopters and how awesome Pinochet was for torturing and killing the families of communists, but when some white supremecists take it in the pooper "Ah we have to live by the rule of law" Don't cry for those poor Nazis who lost their website while declaring that the entire staff of the New York Times should be kicked out of a flying Blackhawk onto a parking lot |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:09:49 PM EST
[#19]
In this thread:
Some very intelligent posters ignore the difference between a website host, and a domain name registrar / DNS system. Either purposefully or ignorantly, so that they may virtue signal or satisfy their own confirmation bias. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:10:15 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I.e. There's nothing going on except they're having trouble moving the site? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Lots of people in this thread have never tried to transfer a domain twice in 30 days  Please note that you may not transfer your domain name to a new registrar within the first 60 days after initial registration, or the first 60 days after a transfer. Their first registrar didn't want to reserve their domain name anymore, so they transferred and the second registrar didn't want to reserve their name anymore. Looks like they can't transfer their domain again until the first 60 days of their first transfer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:10:44 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
During the Obama days, ARFCOM was listed as a "potential domestic terrorist" and watched heavily. This includes persons in positions and the most vocal folks. I spoke often to friends in the FBI and they confirmed. Nothing every happened, but to me, that is one step away from being raided/shut down. If Hillary had won, who knows where this place would be. You can't give up on freedoms like the 1st or 2nd. Once the government begins to move in, they will not stop. This is a sad day for free speech and for the internet. I figured ATF would be on here, (obviously) but domestic terrorism? That's kinda scary even being listed as "potential". Maybe all the dinner pics and dog threads saved the site.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:11:46 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Unless it's a liberal trying to get a Christian bakery to make a gay cake, then it's descrimination.  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
OK. One more time for people who couldn't sit through the whole 4 minutes of a School House Rock animated short... The 1st Amendment prevents the government from abridging your right to free speech. There is no comparable protection in the private sector. A business can shut you down for whatever reason. This has nothing to do with the 1st Amendment. Race, color, religion, sex, or national origin are protected federally from discrimination in public accommodations (based on such characteristics). Sexual orientation is protected from discrimination in public accommodations (based on said characteristic) in some states. One can still be fired/denied service/etc., but the government bans solely discriminating federally on the first group of characteristics, it's state laws for sexual orientation. Political beliefs are not covered. If they were discriminated against by a company solely because they're White, they would have a claim. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:16:01 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You really suggesting Stormfront is the website hill you want to battle and die for? You'll find that the important civil rights cases almost always started with some detestable individual or institution. What they do to them, they can do to us. If you don't defend the detestable, the precedent is set and there is no defense for us. It's basic civics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:21:55 PM EST
[#24]
Free speech does apply to privately run networks. A corporation can absolutely decide whether it will host your site or not, based on the content.
Just like you don't have a "right" to come into someone else's home and insult them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:23:05 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Free speech does apply to privately run networks. A corporation can absolutely decide whether it will host your site or not, based on the content. Just like you don't have a "right" to come into someone else's home and insult them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:25:21 PM EST
[#26]
First they came for the Lavabit, and I did not speak out— Because I do not use encryption.
Then they came for the Megaupload, and I did not speak out— Because I do not download files from the internet. Then they came for Stormfront, and I did not speak out— Because I am not an 88er. Then they came for Arfcom— and I could no longer tier1 blade at 45 online from my moms basement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:28:26 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Their site is still up and hosted, it's only the DNS records that have been dropped. Their last recorded IP was 192.169.81.166 If you drop this in a HOSTS file as stormfront.org and www.stormfront.org (their CMS/forum needs to reference the DNS name) the site is still accessible. So the site still exists but DNS isn't routing to it. Who controls DNS again? ICANN does. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:28:46 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Free speech does apply to privately run networks. A corporation can absolutely decide whether it will host your site or not, based on the content. Just like you don't have a "right" to come into someone else's home and insult them. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:30:25 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It becomes a really interesting question when all forms of public discourse are controlled by private entities. Considering the high barriers to entry to market like internet searches, do anti-trust laws begin to apply? Three companies control the major platforms people use to access the internet - microsoft, apple and google. Do we simply give them the ability to control who gets on and what they do when they get there? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The first amendment and free speech really just applies to govt. This is a private company making what could be a business decision, or maybe its just the personal opinion of whoever's in charge. As a free market supporter, I support their right to do what they wish. Their servers, their bandwidth, their business. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:31:16 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you'll remove your hood for a moment, you might be surprised to learn that Obama has left the building. That kinda blows a hole in your ICANN = fedgov bs argument. A private entity's behavior has precisely nothing to do with the 1st Amendment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:31:21 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I just confirmed this works. So the site still exists but DNS isn't routing to it. Who controls DNS again? ICANN does. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Their site is still up and hosted, it's only the DNS records that have been dropped. Their last recorded IP was 192.169.81.166 If you drop this in a HOSTS file as stormfront.org and www.stormfront.org (their CMS/forum needs to reference the DNS name) the site is still accessible. So the site still exists but DNS isn't routing to it. Who controls DNS again? ICANN does. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:31:57 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1st amendment doesn't set well with some folks around here, unless they agree with you. This'll be good. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:33:26 PM EST
[#33]
I'd like to see all these same people, supporting Storm Front. Also defend an ANTIFA site getting taken down.
In fact, people laughed their asses off at DU being knocked offline by DNS attack. Nobody cried about DU's first amendment rights that hackers were denying them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:34:14 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Free speech does apply to privately run networks. A corporation can absolutely decide whether it will host your site or not, based on the content. Just like you don't have a "right" to come into someone else's home and insult them. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Free speech does apply to privately run networks. A corporation can absolutely decide whether it will host your site or not, based on the content. Just like you don't have a "right" to come into someone else's home and insult them. Quoted:
I'd like to see all these same people, supporting Storm Front. Also defend an ANTIFA site getting taken down. In fact, people laughed their asses off at DU being knocked offline by DNS attack. Nobody cried about DU's first amendment rights that hackers were denying them. This is about the domain name registration system. And you have to understand that first before you understand the distinction between getting hacked, and this. - IF confirmed - thus far the claim hasn't been confirmed to be true in all particulars. All we *know* is their registrar declined to be their registrar any more. DNS registrar was transferred to Google. And is now stuck there. To draw an imperfect analogy: Getting hacked would be kids coming along and stealing your mailbox / wrapping your house. What has (possibly) happened here is a government backed organization came along and removed your mailbox and all references in the phonebook to it - and their phonebook is the only possible way to look you up due to government granted monopoly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:36:29 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Registrars reserve the domain name. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Their site is still up and hosted, it's only the DNS records that have been dropped. Their last recorded IP was 192.169.81.166 If you drop this in a HOSTS file as stormfront.org and www.stormfront.org (their CMS/forum needs to reference the DNS name) the site is still accessible. So the site still exists but DNS isn't routing to it. Who controls DNS again? ICANN does. ICANN is the one who is denying the transfer, so they've been delisted by current registrar and ICANN won't let them move to a new one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:37:24 PM EST
[#36]
STORMFRONT IS JUST THE BEGINNING OF THEIR CAMPAIGN!!!!
WAKE THE FUCK UP AMERICA! !! https://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/stormfront?lang=en |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:39:57 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
https://i.imgflip.com/1urzqk.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Free speech does apply to privately run networks. A corporation can absolutely decide whether it will host your site or not, based on the content. Just like you don't have a "right" to come into someone else's home and insult them. They're a government body in all but name, they're masquerading as a private company so that they can pull shit like this. When the government acts to create "private" sector monopolies so that it can use those "private" companies to silence speech that is objectionable, that's a problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:39:58 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They're not being allowed to transfer to a new registrar. ICANN is the one who is denying the transfer, so they've been delisted by current registrar and ICANN won't let them move to a new one. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Their site is still up and hosted, it's only the DNS records that have been dropped. Their last recorded IP was 192.169.81.166 If you drop this in a HOSTS file as stormfront.org and www.stormfront.org (their CMS/forum needs to reference the DNS name) the site is still accessible. So the site still exists but DNS isn't routing to it. Who controls DNS again? ICANN does. ICANN is the one who is denying the transfer, so they've been delisted by current registrar and ICANN won't let them move to a new one. Please note that you may not transfer your domain name to a new registrar within the first 60 days after initial registration, or the first 60 days after a transfer. Their first registrar didn't want to reserve their domain name anymore, so they transferred and the second registrar didn't want to reserve their name anymore. Looks like they can't transfer their domain again until the first 60 days of their first transfer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:41:06 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryOr we could expand the scope of the 1st Amendment so that if you want to enjoy the benefits of American incorporation you must abide by Constitutional protections.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:43:28 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Or we could expand the scope of the 1st Amendment so that if you want to enjoy the benefits of American incorporation you must abide by Constitutional protections. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:43:58 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Their site is still up and hosted, it's only the DNS records that have been dropped. Their last recorded IP was 192.169.81.166 If you drop this in a HOSTS file as stormfront.org and www.stormfront.org (their CMS/forum needs to reference the DNS name) the site is still accessible. So the site still exists but DNS isn't routing to it. Who controls DNS again? ICANN does. ICANN is the one who is denying the transfer, so they've been delisted by current registrar and ICANN won't let them move to a new one. Please note that you may not transfer your domain name to a new registrar within the first 60 days after initial registration, or the first 60 days after a transfer. Their first registrar didn't want to reserve their domain name anymore, so they transferred and the second registrar didn't want to reserve their name anymore. Looks like they can't transfer their domain again until the first 60 days of their first transfer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:56:06 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lots of people in this thread have never tried to transfer a domain twice in 60 days Google swooped em up and then put em in a bag and dumped it in a river lol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 1:57:00 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's a theft issue, these private companies seized the domain so that it couldn't be rehosted elsewhere. ICANN is refusing to allow it to be transferred. There are several registrar companies that would be willing to host it but ICANN won't allow it. ICANN was handed a total monopoly by the US government under Obama, specifically so that it could engage in actions like this as an ostensibly "private" company. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 2:03:26 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1-first off no one really knows what happened to Stormfront. 2-the point is Stormfront is somehow perceived as "better" than DU and other scumbags. People were posting about throwing liberals out of helicopters and how awesome Pinochet was for torturing and killing the families of communists, but when some white supremecists take it in the pooper "Ah we have to live by the rule of law" Don't cry for those poor Nazis who lost their website while declaring that the entire staff of the New York Times should be kicked out of a flying Blackhawk onto a parking lot Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Watching hapless tards get hacked is very different from seeing a provider flush a site completely. Drawing a false equivalence between the two is disingenuous at best in my opinion. Being disgusted by pc censorship is in no way similar to laughing at poor site protection/maintenance. The left think black rifles are evil...it won't be a happy day when this site gets vaporized. 2-the point is Stormfront is somehow perceived as "better" than DU and other scumbags. People were posting about throwing liberals out of helicopters and how awesome Pinochet was for torturing and killing the families of communists, but when some white supremecists take it in the pooper "Ah we have to live by the rule of law" Don't cry for those poor Nazis who lost their website while declaring that the entire staff of the New York Times should be kicked out of a flying Blackhawk onto a parking lot I have seen what you refer to but I never took it at face value and considered it hyperbole in the service of pointing out how dangerous some groups are. Perhaps I am naive but I don't think many here actually believe in throwing people out of helicopters...if they do that is not good to say the least. All the forgoing being said, I generally like the people on this forum and tend to think of them in a positive light...this is a bias which I frankly am ok with. I could be wrong...but I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 2:06:22 PM EST
[#45]
first you get rid of all the Nazis and KKKrs ...making sure you have good Americans against them all and for any violations of civil rights.
then you slowly begin adding to the Nazi KKK list all your enemies until they are all gone to. then you can start on anyone who disagrees with you for any reason |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 2:12:19 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
first you get rid of all the Nazis and KKKrs ...making sure you have good Americans against them all and for any violations of civil rights. then you slowly begin adding to the Nazi KKK list all your enemies until they are all gone to. then you can start on anyone who disagrees with you for any reason |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 2:14:48 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why does that rule exist? What good reason is there to have such a rule at all Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Their site is still up and hosted, it's only the DNS records that have been dropped. Their last recorded IP was 192.169.81.166 If you drop this in a HOSTS file as stormfront.org and www.stormfront.org (their CMS/forum needs to reference the DNS name) the site is still accessible. So the site still exists but DNS isn't routing to it. Who controls DNS again? ICANN does. ICANN is the one who is denying the transfer, so they've been delisted by current registrar and ICANN won't let them move to a new one. Please note that you may not transfer your domain name to a new registrar within the first 60 days after initial registration, or the first 60 days after a transfer. Their first registrar didn't want to reserve their domain name anymore, so they transferred and the second registrar didn't want to reserve their name anymore. Looks like they can't transfer their domain again until the first 60 days of their first transfer. and is it not able to be waived? https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/name-holder-faqs-2012-02-25-en https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/policy-2012-03-07-en |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 2:31:48 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Their site is still up and hosted, it's only the DNS records that have been dropped. Their last recorded IP was 192.169.81.166 If you drop this in a HOSTS file as stormfront.org and www.stormfront.org (their CMS/forum needs to reference the DNS name) the site is still accessible. So the site still exists but DNS isn't routing to it. Who controls DNS again? ICANN does. ICANN is the one who is denying the transfer, so they've been delisted by current registrar and ICANN won't let them move to a new one. Please note that you may not transfer your domain name to a new registrar within the first 60 days after initial registration, or the first 60 days after a transfer. Their first registrar didn't want to reserve their domain name anymore, so they transferred and the second registrar didn't want to reserve their name anymore. Looks like they can't transfer their domain again until the first 60 days of their first transfer. and is it not able to be waived? https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/name-holder-faqs-2012-02-25-en https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/policy-2012-03-07-en It doesn't prevent the initial transfer of a domain, it only prevents subsequent transfers, so a hijacker could still take it and transfer it to a new registrar where they control it. Even in light of that dubiously effective policy the prohibition should be easily waived in a situation where no such domain hijacking has taken place, as is clearly the case here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 2:33:09 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Incorrect. The majority of American Jews are lefties. The lefty MSM is largely controlled by Jews. Did you really not know that Jeff Zucker (CNN) was Jewish? A lot of lefties support Palestine/Muslims over Israel, but they don't have a problem with American Jews being part of their commie club. Many of those American Jews are not pro-Israel, such as the Sulzberger family that runs the New York Times. And keep in mind that the left is not perfectly unified, where all of them think exactly alike. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
LOL. Nope you're fucked dude. The lefties don't like Joos either. If you LOOK white, you ARE white. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 2:35:45 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The only possible justification given is to prevent domain hijacking, which is bunk. It doesn't prevent the initial transfer of a domain, it only prevents subsequent transfers, so a hijacker could still take it and transfer it to a new registrar where they control it. Even in light of that dubiously effective policy the prohibition should be easily waived in a situation where no such domain hijacking has taken place, as is clearly the case here. After 60 days have passed, sure. Then someone has to have taken specific action to override those same automatic tasks to keep them from doing what they do, and transferring the domain. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
