DirectNic Demands SlicksNetwork.com Hand Over Model IDs

[sudden]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Ok lets talk about the business model of using a bogus virus scan that tells you that your machine is infected and even pops out the CD tray to encourage the surfer to get the "cure" which is nothing more than a trojan for adware.

Go ahead and talk about it. Doesn't make it the case. Putting emphasis on something, or elevating the risk more than other businesses and 'bogus' is not the same thing. And buying advertising from an ad network is not the same thing as owning the ad network. Though I understand the confusion, seeing as you have been stuck on the Lars deal for months now and still seem to think he's a partner in Zango.

Get your facts straight. Oh and maybe you should try some of the shit you keep bitching about so as to stop making a lousy $4k/mo I'm sure you'd be less interested in the business of others and their methods if you were at a decent income, like $40k/mo...

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by LadyMischief

I'm not ANTI-Directnic.. I just don't feel that a registrar has the right to demand id's from someone. I do believe htey have the right to report him, to shut him down, to give him the opportunity to respond. But the way this entire thing was handled was very much a jumping of the gun in my PERSONAL opinion, and the results of this could be far-reaching. Don't tell me that if DirectNIC doesn't pull this off unscathed, other registrars won't be doing the same kinds of things, and who knows for what reasons? Maybe DirectNIC DOES have a good reason, but if so they better produce it damned quick, or it's going to be the beginning of a disturbing trend that could threaten ALL adult business.

I disagree only on the point that they don't have the right to do it. When the contract was signed, the right was given. Period. If you (universal you there) had a problem with the contract, either don't agree to it or take a case to court to prove the contract unenforceable thereby forcing the registrar to change the contract. A third option would be after the fact getting an injunction stopping the contact from being enforced until a judge can rule on the contracts legality.

None of these were done which in my mind says that the contract is considered enforceable by Slick's lawyer and makes all the discussion about whether DN has the right or not moot.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by sudden

Go ahead and talk about it. Doesn't make it the case. Putting emphasis on something, or elevating the risk more than other businesses and 'bogus' is not the same thing. And buying advertising from an ad network is not the same thing as owning the ad network. Though I understand the confusion, seeing as you have been stuck on the Lars deal for months now and still seem to think he's a partner in Zango.

Get your facts straight. Oh and maybe you should try some of the shit you keep bitching about so as to stop making a lousy $4k/mo I'm sure you'd be less interested in the business of others and their methods if you were at a decent income, like $40k/mo...

So you think is a good business model to trick a surfer with a bogus virus scan and pop out the cd tray .... load the "fix" on the machine.. which is nothing more than a trojan for adware?

[Peaches]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Ill look when Im done with work.

Cool - I'll get my paperwork ready to sue my lawyers with

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by Peaches

Cool - I'll get my paperwork ready to sue my lawyers with

Get a lot of paper..

Every Govt agency I know of photocopies it as well.

[Peaches]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Get a lot of paper..

Every Govt agency I know of photocopies it as well.

So the government, my attorneys and the credit bureaus are all breaking the law? Excellent. Class action suit.

[TheEnforcer]

Originally Posted by Peaches

So the government, my attorneys and the credit bureaus are all breaking the law? Excellent. Class action suit.

Laws on the books are very often outright ignored for practical purposes.

[tony404]

Originally Posted by LadyMischief

I'm not ANTI-Directnic.. I just don't feel that a registrar has the right to demand id's from someone. I do believe htey have the right to report him, to shut him down, to give him the opportunity to respond. But the way this entire thing was handled was very much a jumping of the gun in my PERSONAL opinion, and the results of this could be far-reaching. Don't tell me that if DirectNIC doesn't pull this off unscathed, other registrars won't be doing the same kinds of things, and who knows for what reasons? Maybe DirectNIC DOES have a good reason, but if so they better produce it damned quick, or it's going to be the beginning of a disturbing trend that could threaten ALL adult business.

No waiting for the government to really start regulating us , could really threaten us. Im sorry but everything isnt ok , we as a industry have to say somethings cross the line or we will be very fucked.

[Peaches]

Originally Posted by TheEnforcer

Laws on the books are very often outright ignored for practical purposes.

Hey, I have a closing in a couple of weeks - I just want to be able to walk in there and say "Look - no you may NOT have a copy of my driver's license"

(yeah, I'll give it to them anyway because they're friends, but it will be fun if Gonzo's right )

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by Peaches

Hey, I have a closing in a couple of weeks - I just want to be able to walk in there and say "Look - no you may NOT have a copy of my driver's license"

(yeah, I'll give it to them anyway because they're friends, but it will be fun if Gonzo's right )

I know your keeping count over there.

How many times in the past have I steered you wrong?

Eventaully the truth comes out and you find yourself agreeing with me.

If they have changed the law since I was a cop I will let you know that too.

[sudden]

Originally Posted by gonzo

So you think is a good business model to trick a surfer with a bogus virus scan and pop out the cd tray .... load the "fix" on the machine.. which is nothing more than a trojan for adware?

Didn't say I did. Nor do I know who you're referring to when you mention a bogus virus scan. My point was you may want to try some ideas that you haven't tried as you're obviously not doing too well with what you're doing right now, and you seem very bitter about it complaining about what everyone else (who is doing well) is doing wrong.

And asking other's on how to do shady shit (but getting no help) doesn't count as far as trying ideas go.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by sudden

Didn't say I did. Nor do I know who you're referring to when you mention a bogus virus scan. My point was you may want to try some ideas that you haven't tried as you're obviously not doing too well with what you're doing right now, and you seem very bitter about it complaining about what everyone else (who is doing well) is doing wrong.

And asking other's on how to do shady shit (but getting no help) doesn't count as far as trying ideas go.

So you dont work for or own innovativemarketing?

[AnotherGrogan]

Hello folks

I'm not in the Adult Website business (though I've often thought about having an adult site)

I'm a user who has been going to reallyeighteen.com (and sites like it) periodically for a few years roughly and I'd like to share my perspective on this.

The problem as I perceive it is that the site doesn't really host the content, the thumbnails are redirects that pass control over to other sites and each time you click them you may end up somewhere else. The links don't always lead to the pictures shown in the thumbnails and once you get to another gallery of similar redirects you just don't know where you are going to end up if you click those links. Sometimes good, sometimes bad. Grannies, kiddies, animal sex... nothing to do with the thumbnail images.

Indeed, a few times I've ended up at galleries showing pictures of what are obviously children. I haven't worried that much about it because it was very infrequent and I just closed that particular browser tab if I saw anything like that, realizing it's not really their fault once control has been passed on to another site.

Yesterday, I noticed that there was no dns for reallyeighteen. At the time I thought it was just a temporary glitch, or they were moving or something. I know how to use whois and get the authoritative nameserver and then query that to get the IP. So I did that, and set up a hosts file entry for the site so the virtual hostname would work. It seemed to be business as usual, but I hadn't been there in a few weeks.

Today, when I checked and the problem still wasn't solved I started to suspect that something like this had occurred and started to search for answers. Google has de-listed them from their databases, citing a request from chillingeffects.org. So the only info I found was from a few (questionable) spyware removal sites with instructions for cookie removal (I use Linux so I don't give a shit about Windows malware, and I always delete cookies and browsing data after visiting adult sites so that's no problem either)

A Yahoo search led me to this discussion here and now I understand what's going on. Looking again at the registrar info, I now see it's in "Registrar-hold" status (didn't read the info that closely yesterday)

From my perspective, I'll not be going back to reallyeighteen again, because I simply don't want to be associated with the stigma of "kiddie porn". I like pictures of nice young ladies in the 18-20 age range (I'm not even especially fond of "hard core"), but I'm not exposing myself to some potential overzealous and righteous ISP employee for what I might accidently land on. It really got me thinking about that. Whether charges hold up in court or not, once you've been accused of anything to do with child porn you're finished.

It's unfortunate, and I agree that this should not be the job of a domain registrar. Not only that, how the Hell can they provide ID for the models when it's not even them who has "hired" them? Maybe I'm not fully understanding how all of this works, but it seems to me that perhaps slick networks just has to be more discriminating in their afiliations. Shutting them down is inappropriate. Cripes... drop their domains and let them transfer them or re-register elsewhere if they don't approve of the content. That's where the registrar's responsibility should end. Similar for Web hosts. Drop the customer if you don't approve, but don't fuck with them.

I'm sure I'm not alone in the way I think, so this has probably really hurt them. They'll not be able to use those domain names again... they'll have to start anew. This whole thing sickens me and that domain registrar can burn in Hell. I'll certainly never use or recommend them.

Again, I do not want to encounter child porn, but this is way over the top.

[gonzo]

Anyone here doesnt think this is a huge issue now?

[LadyMischief]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Anyone here doesnt think this is a huge issue now?

I thought so the second I saw the first post on GFY. Our lawyers are reviewing everything (on the US side). As far as the Canadian side I already know where we stand (as I am currently a privacy comissioner for our former content company, we still have to hold the records even if we are not currently conducting business).

[softball]

This is huge. Has there been any rebuttal from Directnic?

[Peaches]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Anyone here doesnt think this is a huge issue now?

I think that's the fakest "surfer letter" I've ever seen.

[Peaches]

Originally Posted by gonzo

I know your keeping count over there.

How many times in the past have I steered you wrong?

Eventaully the truth comes out and you find yourself agreeing with me.

If they have changed the law since I was a cop I will let you know that too.

Gonzo, you've been wrong plenty of times

And when were you a cop? What town/county? It had to have been at least 10+ years ago, so yeah, I suspect a few laws have changed, lol.

[Jace]

Originally Posted by AnotherGrogan

Hello folks

I'm not in the Adult Website business (though I've often thought about having an adult site)

I'm a user who has been going to reallyeighteen.com (and sites like it) periodically for a few years roughly and I'd like to share my perspective on this.

The problem as I perceive it is that the site doesn't really host the content, the thumbnails are redirects that pass control over to other sites and each time you click them you may end up somewhere else. The links don't always lead to the pictures shown in the thumbnails and once you get to another gallery of similar redirects you just don't know where you are going to end up if you click those links. Sometimes good, sometimes bad. Grannies, kiddies, animal sex... nothing to do with the thumbnail images.

Indeed, a few times I've ended up at galleries showing pictures of what are obviously children. I haven't worried that much about it because it was very infrequent and I just closed that particular browser tab if I saw anything like that, realizing it's not really their fault once control has been passed on to another site.

Yesterday, I noticed that there was no dns for reallyeighteen. At the time I thought it was just a temporary glitch, or they were moving or something. I know how to use whois and get the authoritative nameserver and then query that to get the IP. So I did that, and set up a hosts file entry for the site so the virtual hostname would work. It seemed to be business as usual, but I hadn't been there in a few weeks.

Today, when I checked and the problem still wasn't solved I started to suspect that something like this had occurred and started to search for answers. Google has de-listed them from their databases, citing a request from chillingeffects.org. So the only info I found was from a few (questionable) spyware removal sites with instructions for cookie removal (I use Linux so I don't give a shit about Windows malware, and I always delete cookies and browsing data after visiting adult sites so that's no problem either)

A Yahoo search led me to this discussion here and now I understand what's going on. Looking again at the registrar info, I now see it's in "Registrar-hold" status (didn't read the info that closely yesterday)

From my perspective, I'll not be going back to reallyeighteen again, because I simply don't want to be associated with the stigma of "kiddie porn". I like pictures of nice young ladies in the 18-20 age range (I'm not even especially fond of "hard core"), but I'm not exposing myself to some potential overzealous and righteous ISP employee for what I might accidently land on. It really got me thinking about that. Whether charges hold up in court or not, once you've been accused of anything to do with child porn you're finished.

It's unfortunate, and I agree that this should not be the job of a domain registrar. Not only that, how the Hell can they provide ID for the models when it's not even them who has "hired" them? Maybe I'm not fully understanding how all of this works, but it seems to me that perhaps slick networks just has to be more discriminating in their afiliations. Shutting them down is inappropriate. Cripes... drop their domains and let them transfer them or re-register elsewhere if they don't approve of the content. That's where the registrar's responsibility should end. Similar for Web hosts. Drop the customer if you don't approve, but don't fuck with them.

I'm sure I'm not alone in the way I think, so this has probably really hurt them. They'll not be able to use those domain names again... they'll have to start anew. This whole thing sickens me and that domain registrar can burn in Hell. I'll certainly never use or recommend them.

Again, I do not want to encounter child porn, but this is way over the top.

after reading this a few times I have to agree it looks pretty fake

then again, the one thing I hate about the internet comes into play, you never fucking know anymore

[softball]

The veracity of that letter is way suspicious.

[AnotherGrogan]

Folks, I'm not sure how I could prove it, but I'm a very real person and this was really bothering me today when I came across this discussion. I'm not even sure what you would be implying when suspecting my post as being fake. You think someone put me up to this to skew some point of discussion in this forum?

I've stated my opinion (and it's factual about the thumbnail links on the reallyeighteen site being redirects... rather obvious when I click them)

My screen name is Grogan, I've used it for around 11 years on computer help Web sites and IRC servers. I use it with honour and integrity, just as if it were my real name. Someone here was already registered as Grogan. I do not give real names or other personal info. If an administrator of this forum wishes to contact me, they may do so using the email address in my profile and I will answer any questions they may have about me. Yes, that's really me in the picture I've just uploaded as an avatar.

When I register to make a post on a forum, I do stick around a bit for follow up discussion. I've now read some other threads here too.

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by AnotherGrogan

I've stated my opinion (and it's factual about the thumbnail links on the reallyeighteen site being redirects... rather obvious when I click them)

That is still no excuse for what I saw on the various sites in question and I never went past the thumbs.

Each and every webmaster has the responsibility of running their sites in an honest, ethical method and also need to be constantly policing themselves. The only possible excuse for not being in full control of the content of your site and the links from your sites would be getting hacked and in that case it should be a very temporary thing. It is also every webmasters responsibility to make sure their sites do not get hacked by keeping adequate security in place.

[softball]

Originally Posted by sarettah

That is still no excuse for what I saw on the various sites in question and I never went past the thumbs.

Each and every webmaster has the responsibility of running their sites in an honest, ethical method and also need to be constantly policing themselves. The only possible excuse for not being in full control of the content of your site and the links from your sites would be getting hacked and in that case it should be a very temporary thing. It is also every webmasters responsibility to make sure their sites do not get hacked by keeping adequate security in place.

For once we actually agree on something.

[AnotherGrogan]

Originally Posted by sarettah

Each and every webmaster has the responsibility of running their sites in an honest, ethical method and also need to be constantly policing themselves. The only possible excuse for not being in full control of the content of your site and the links from your sites would be getting hacked and in that case it should be a very temporary thing. It is also every webmasters responsibility to make sure their sites do not get hacked by keeping adequate security in place.

As I said, perhaps he needs to do just that (re-evaluate his affiliates). What DirectNIC has done is overstepping their bounds. My point about it being redirects is, how would it be possible to submit "ID" for the models in the links that are just redirects?

In my time at that site (reallyeighteen), I saw nothing in the thumbnails that made me think it might lead to "cp". Young looking college age girls are not kiddie porn either.

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by AnotherGrogan

As I said, perhaps he needs to do just that (re-evaluate his affiliates). What DirectNIC has done is overstepping their bounds. My point about it being redirects is, how would it be possible to submit "ID" for the models in the links that are just redirects?

In my time at that site (reallyeighteen), I saw nothing in the thumbnails that made me think it might lead to "cp". Young looking college age girls are not kiddie porn either.

Reallyeighteen was not the one causing the trouble from what I saw. Directnic basically siezed his entire account so everything he had registered with them was hit.

[AnotherGrogan]

Ok, sorry for having tunnel vision there. Reallyeighteen is the site that concerned me because it's one that I was using. I do also recall landing on amateurcurves through the redirects, but didn't realize they were the same people. I don't recall seeing anything bad there either.

I really hadn't given it much thought until today.

[LadyMischief]

Originally Posted by AnotherGrogan

As I said, perhaps he needs to do just that (re-evaluate his affiliates). What DirectNIC has done is overstepping their bounds. My point about it being redirects is, how would it be possible to submit "ID" for the models in the links that are just redirects?

In my time at that site (reallyeighteen), I saw nothing in the thumbnails that made me think it might lead to "cp". Young looking college age girls are not kiddie porn either.

I think you're referring to what they call in TGP as a SKIM. There's a difference between when you click a thumb and the skim sends you to a trade (in effect sending you to another site), or when it sends you to a gallery listing. A gallery listing oftentimes will have a link at the bottom with a "click here for 2257 information". Those are the listings that are "resident" to the tgp, as they are static links. THe redirected links are other people's sites, essentially.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by AnotherGrogan

Folks, I'm not sure how I could prove it, but I'm a very real person and this was really bothering me today when I came across this discussion. I'm not even sure what you would be implying when suspecting my post as being fake. You think someone put me up to this to skew some point of discussion in this forum?

I've stated my opinion (and it's factual about the thumbnail links on the reallyeighteen site being redirects... rather obvious when I click them)

My screen name is Grogan, I've used it for around 11 years on computer help Web sites and IRC servers. I use it with honour and integrity, just as if it were my real name. Someone here was already registered as Grogan. I do not give real names or other personal info. If an administrator of this forum wishes to contact me, they may do so using the email address in my profile and I will answer any questions they may have about me. Yes, that's really me in the picture I've just uploaded as an avatar.

When I register to make a post on a forum, I do stick around a bit for follow up discussion. I've now read some other threads here too.

Ive looked at your IP and the pool it comes thru.

Thats good enough for me.

I think this is a first but.... Welcome to Oprano.

[LadyMischief]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Ive looked at your IP and the pool it comes thru.

Thats good enough for me.

I think this is a first but.... Welcome to Oprano.

No kidding Don't often see this kind of crossover, but this fellow is a bright sort to have followed things this far. Welcome AnotherGrogan

[AnotherGrogan]

Originally Posted by LadyMischief

I think you're referring to what they call in TGP as a SKIM. There's a difference between when you click a thumb and the skim sends you to a trade (in effect sending you to another site), or when it sends you to a gallery listing. A gallery listing oftentimes will have a link at the bottom with a "click here for 2257 information". Those are the listings that are "resident" to the tgp, as they are static links. THe redirected links are other people's sites, essentially.

Thanks for the explanation. I didn't know the terminology, but yes that's what I'm describing. Most thumbnail links on tgp sites do seem to lead to other domains, but I never really thought about which ones are resident. I just thought of those tgp sites as portals to affiliate and advertiser sites.

I've learned a few things by reading some threads here today and following some links, including a bit about how many of these TGP sites operate. I didn't realize the degree of automation in updating the pages.

I've seen "2257" info before, but it always seemed to be more of a disclaimer to me. "These models were over the age of 18 when the pics were taken, and records are held by those who published the pics" or whatever it says. I never paid a lot of attention to it as I don't live in the US.

So then, a domain registrar might overstep their bounds in more ways than one. Namely, exerting self granted authority where laws like this have no jurisdiction. For example, someone might have no such requirement in another country to be able to produce such records (or as mentioned, it might even be prohibited by law to disclose such info), yet a righteous domain registrar can lock up the domains and demand that they produce this? Registrars should be just that... registrars.

Edit: I should think that sort of policing is more appropriate for a hosting provider, to object to content and take sites offline. Domain registrars should provide the administrative service of registering domains, impartially.

-----------------------------------------------

Also, thanks for the welcome Gonzo and LadyMischief. This looks like a pretty cool place :-)

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by tony404

Internet policing ? its called a industry regulating itself or the government starts regulating for you. Imagine if everyone policed cp on line instead of waiting for the police. If you got proof everyone is of age ,you really got nothing to worry about.There would be no safe place for cp to happen in the internet world. oh I forgot in the online world its everyone's god given right to do whatever the fuck they want until they are arrested.
Then they cry why do they pick on us. lol

This isn't industry regulation though. This is one company appointing itself as having the authority to shutdown another company's business based upon regulations that have never even been validated in a court of law by a judge. I think most of the "industry" in fact still feels that 2257 as written is unconstitutional in fact.

Now I'm not defending anyone who wants to take pics of very young looking girls without covering their ass and making sure they're 18 and having ample docs to back it up. But in this case, I'm thinking more and more based on information available that Directnic overstepped their bounds. I'd be ok with it if they'd just opted not to do business with the guy and bounced him. That's what I do with people whose practices I do not like, I simply dont do business with them.

But they are way out on a limb here by locking the domain where it cant be moved if that is indeed what is happening. I keep thinking there has to be more to this than meets the eye as it doesn't make sense for Directnic to make a move this harsh.

My docs are clean, but I have to admit that I'd be BEYOND PISSED if a registrar put me on the spot like that. I'm their customer and they want to scrutinize my business? It's like having your landlord want to come in and make sure you have all of the required DOL information posted on your bulletin board in the breakroom. That's not their role.

Hosts can request docs when DMCA is put into play. And 2257 says Uncle Sam can knock on your door and inspect your records. Beyond that, vendors have no entitlement to audit a damned thing.

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by gonzo

For instance its illegal to copy a drivers license in the state of Georgia.

Copy it without permission? Yeah, that would likely be covered under the Open Records Act as DMV records are specifically excluded in the state of Georgia.

But if you're saying it's illegal to copy it if someone voluntarily supplies it to you, then I call bullshit unless you can find the statute. If it's true, it's violated left and right by everyone including the state.

Everyone from the DOL on down asks you to supply a "government issued photo id" which they copy for their records as proof they checked it. They dont say it HAS to be drivers license, but that is typically the ONLY government issued photo id most people carry with them.

Because there is protected personal information on a driver's license, privacy laws would also dictate how that copy would be stored, who can access it, etc.

But as far as I know if I hand you my driver's license for you to copy, there's nothing illegal.

Now a tip for anyone who ever wants to take issue with people who ask for it, you can get a state provided "photo identification card" that is totally separate from your driver's license. In Georgia, you get it at the DMV, same basic process as driver's license (need to provide birth certificate, etc) you just dont have to take the driver's test.

[softball]

I have a bit of an issue with Directnic's silence. They seem to be dealing with this the same way they did when accused of kiting. They ignored it. Maybe it is a good business strategy, but in the long run, I don't think it is effective. Once maybe, but twice or more is just ducking. Or, like I said earlier, are they trying to bail on adult and come out fighting in the straight market.

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

I have a bit of an issue with Directnic's silence. They seem to be dealing with this the same way they did when accused of kiting. They ignored it. Maybe it is a good business strategy, but in the long run, I don't think it is effective. Once maybe, but twice or more is just ducking. Or, like I said earlier, are they trying to bail on adult and come out fighting in the straight market.

Again signs point to there being something going on we do not know.

Unless their domain portfolio is balanced radically different from how I think it is, dumping adult and going after the likes of GoDaddy, etc for mainstream marketshare doesn't seem too bright. Only way that would make sense would be if they have a potential mainstream buyer on the hook who is asking them to clean things up.

Let's say a public company was looking to buy them, only a matter of time before competitors clue in the media and it's leaked that Directnic is home to A LOT of porn domains. This makes public company look bad and brings questions from shareholders and media that they do not want. Now paint the same scenario but arm your PR team with the actions Directnic is doing right now.

Kinda makes you go hmmmmmm.....

[AnotherGrogan]

I found the thread at "GFY" (heheh, nice acronym) and read through most of it. Well I had to skip some of the pages in the middle because it's just too many and too much bickering. Time for bed, delirium setting in. There's lots I hadn't considered, but I haven't really changed my opinion.

I see my post got quoted and scrutinized there as well. I'm not going to register there, but I can assure you that no, adult sites have nothing to do with my business. I'm a "surfer" in terms of not being an adult site operator but I'm a surfer that knows a thing or ten about how the Internet works. Some of us techies like to look at galleries too. Mr. Presumptuous over there is welcome to a nice steaming cup of "Shut the Heck Up". Tasty stuff. I know

[LadyMischief]

Ok, I think I do need to make a statement about TGP, since I know the vast majority of people here have limited experience with the medium, and probably know even less about running one/maintaining trades.


Anyone who's ever run a tgp knows that it's a full time job. If you run a NETWORK of them, even moreso. Some of these tgps have HUNDREDS of trades, it's the way that they ensure traffic growth to their own sites. Each trade has to be hand-reviewed before it's put in, and TGP owners have to continually go BACK to these trades to make sure what's put there is NOT illegal or offensive (such as CP). Oftentimes only going to a site once you will NOT neccessarily see anything that would be offensive, and MANY times these assholes who run the tgps/networks that DO offer CP do NOT put those things into place until AFTER they establish trades with people. So let me give a scenario that might make people realize that Slick as much as his diligence would have helped, also fell victim in a way to something that happens to tgp people on a consitant basis.

Let's lay out the scenario. I'm a tgp owner looking for trades or adding trades to my site.. Someone sends me an email or contacts me looking for a trade (or perhaps even enters it into an automatic form that some scripts have for trades). I review the site and everything looks good, so I add him into my trade system (this is where the skims go, that percentage can be changed, but only within a certain median if it's going to maintain site growth). He putters in my trades for a while, I don't go back to check every day, I have 500 trades, I can't review them all daily. I have my hands full going through the 10,000+ galleries sitting in queue from chameleon submitter people and other submits. So the trade I added starts putting up CP, and suddenly my skims/trades are CP sites, even though they weren't when I added them. I wouldn't know this unless a) I went to my trades every day, b) someone reported it to me or c) one of my trades reported the problem or posted somewhere and they let me know. It's not like it's something that's in their face every second.

Not to mention the fact that most tgp scripts run some sort of thumb rotator, so two different people going to a page will NOT neccessarily see the same thumbs, and this can make it even MORE difficult to detect potential difficulties within the trades. Slick can be responsible for what is on his own network, and he can do his BEST to stay on top of his trades, but in reality, he may not ever have known that his trades had CP or "virtual" CP on them. It would have been very likely in fact that he never had a clue.

Just throwing this out there because people are very quick to hold Slick to the fire for his "affiliations" without actually realizing everything that's involved in that process. Due diligence would have helped him a lot, but in all honesty I can see very well how he wouldn't have gone and reviewed every trade on every site on his network on a consistant enough basis to weed out problem trades. I can almost guarantee there are a dozen other tgps right now trading traffic with the sites Slick is getting nailed for trading with, and they don't even realize what's on those sites.

(Remember the trades I'm talking about are the "redirects", that's the TGP skim, it's a percentage of traffic that tgp owners trade around to promote the growth of their systems... If a script sends 2 hits to so and so, their script will send him hits back, and it's this kind of traffic trades that grow tgps).

[LadyMischief]

Originally Posted by AnotherGrogan

I found the thread at "GFY" (heheh, nice acronym) and read through most of it. Well I had to skip some of the pages in the middle because it's just too many and too much bickering. Time for bed, delirium setting in. There's lots I hadn't considered, but I haven't really changed my opinion.

I see my post got quoted and scrutinized there as well. I'm not going to register there, but I can assure you that no, adult sites have nothing to do with my business. I'm a "surfer" in terms of not being an adult site operator but I'm a surfer that knows a thing or ten about how the Internet works. Some of us techies like to look at galleries too. Mr. Presumptuous over there is welcome to a nice steaming cup of "Shut the Heck Up". Tasty stuff. I know

You are in Ontario too and seem like a super smart guy. I'd love to chat with you.. Please email me, treasure@homegrownvideo.com Seems to me I could use a "surfer" with your kind of smarts for something I'm working on You can also hit me up on icq 3522039.

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by LadyMischief

Slick can be responsible for what is on his own network, and he can do his BEST to stay on top of his trades, but in reality, he may not ever have known that his trades had CP or "virtual" CP on them. It would have been very likely in fact that he never had a clue.

All well said LM and I would agree with most of what you said.

However, I saw the thumbs that were running on one of slicks sites, I never went through to the galleries.

There was no excuse for the thumbs I saw. They were clearly targetting one type of customer and one type only.

Putting aside DN's legal right versus Slick's legal right etc for a second. My personal viewpoint is that anyone targetting that particular market is as bad as the customers in that particular market and the producers of that particular market and any so called "legal" sites or illegal sites that cater to that market. They should all die a very slow painful death and I personally don't give a fuck what anyone does to them legal or illegal. I do not care how we get rid of them, I just want them gone.

[Peaches]

Originally Posted by Hell Puppy

But if you're saying it's illegal to copy it if someone voluntarily supplies it to you, then I call bullshit unless you can find the statute. If it's true, it's violated left and right by everyone including the state.

I'm still waiting for his proof. I guess he's been working the last 24 hours.

[LadyMischief]

Originally Posted by sarettah

All well said LM and I would agree with most of what you said.

However, I saw the thumbs that were running on one of slicks sites, I never went through to the galleries.

There was no excuse for the thumbs I saw. They were clearly targetting one type of customer and one type only.

Putting aside DN's legal right versus Slick's legal right etc for a second. My personal viewpoint is that anyone targetting that particular market is as bad as the customers in that particular market and the producers of that particular market and any so called "legal" sites or illegal sites that cater to that market. They should all die a very slow painful death and I personally don't give a fuck what anyone does to them legal or illegal. I do not care how we get rid of them, I just want them gone.

Slick claims on GFY that most of his thumbs were cut by the autocropper and that if you click through to the galleries the content should match exactly. The question is then is it the thumbs or the content that's questionable, and all the sites he was promoting from what I saw were from reputable (so to speak) sponsors. It leaves a fine tangled web, doesn't it?

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by LadyMischief

Slick claims on GFY that most of his thumbs were cut by the autocropper

Yeah, but I am a programmer. I don't allow people to blame it on the computer.

If you are a webmaster, you are responsible for what is on your site, plain and simple. Doesn't matter if you are running scripts or doing it by hand as far as I'm concerned. Anyone who puts their business completely in the hands of a computer will be out of business one way or the other in due time.

[Peaches]

TBH, from what I can gather STRICTLY on his GFY comments, Slick may have been in the adult industry for years, but he wasn't running it like it was a business. IMO, that's what got him into this mess and more than likely exacerbated it. When your first post is to come on GFY asking who the company is (when they clearly tell you every time you register or renew a domain) and then come back AGAIN to GFY asking for an attorney, admit you THOUGHT all the trades were OK, etc. then you're a sitting target.

[LadyMischief]

Originally Posted by sarettah

Yeah, but I am a programmer. I don't allow people to blame it on the computer.

If you are a webmaster, you are responsible for what is on your site, plain and simple. Doesn't matter if you are running scripts or doing it by hand as far as I'm concerned. Anyone who puts their business completely in the hands of a computer will be out of business one way or the other in due time.

*I* agree with you, however, people will use the tools that are available to them without truly realizing the consequences. Have you ever hand-cropped thousands of thumbs? Just asking.

[LadyMischief]

Originally Posted by Peaches

TBH, from what I can gather STRICTLY on his GFY comments, Slick may have been in the adult industry for years, but he wasn't running it like it was a business. IMO, that's what got him into this mess and more than likely exacerbated it. When your first post is to come on GFY asking who the company is (when they clearly tell you every time you register or renew a domain) and then come back AGAIN to GFY asking for an attorney, admit you THOUGHT all the trades were OK, etc. then you're a sitting target.

I agree, most people who are in the business on this level are not "businesspeople". TGP and those types of aspects of the business can be easier for entry-level folks, but I assure you that the guys that run the big networks are making _MUCH_ more than beer money, and more and more ARE starting to run things like a business, simply because circumstances force them to. I think Slick was kind of caught in the middle of a bigger fight, and just happened to be the unfortunate fellow the hammer fell on first. I truly don't believe he was doing anything other than running his business and making money for his family (and doing very well at it too, the Slick network is well known in the TGP world). He made the same mistakes 1000's of other people are continuing to make, and only education will change that. If nothing else comes out of this thing, it will be a shakeup for people to re-assess how they run their business and to accept that they have taken on liability in how they do things, and have contingencies in place to deal with it.

However all that being said, crucifying the guy without knowing the FULL story isn't exactly fair, either. More than anything I feel his problem was a lack of knowledge, as opposed to an intent of ill.

[LadyMischief]

Originally Posted by AnotherGrogan

Ok, sorry for having tunnel vision there. Reallyeighteen is the site that concerned me because it's one that I was using. I do also recall landing on amateurcurves through the redirects, but didn't realize they were the same people. I don't recall seeing anything bad there either.

I really hadn't given it much thought until today.

TGP Networks will trade to sites both within their network and outside of them. It's a way for them to grow the number of clicks that come into their sites, and (in theory) increase sales.

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by sarettah

There was no excuse for the thumbs I saw. They were clearly targetting one type of customer and one type only.

Exactly right, he was targeting pedophiles. Either that or he's a real idiot and was targeting teenage boys without credit cards.

[softball]

The issue here is not whether slick was right or wrong. I have never seen the material in question.
The issue is whether the registrar can be the judge and jury and hang the accused. I see no evidence of discussions or questioning of slick by DN.
There are courts and police and the FBI to deal with this before cutting off someone's business.
I disagree with Sarettah when he says get rid of all offenders in a legal or illegal manner. That is just lynch mob tactics. Again, we have courts for that.
This is sooooo like the communist witch hunts of the fifties it is scarey.
Personally, I cannot see how any one in this business could possibly defend DN for its actions in this case. We should collectively be raging against this shit.

[LadyMischief]

Originally Posted by Hammer

Exactly right, he was targeting pedophiles. Either that or he's a real idiot and was targeting teenage boys without credit cards.

This is where the line between societal mores and basic human evolution clash. 100 years ago, it was perfectly acceptable and even normal for a 14 year old girl to be married and starting a family. Throughout recorded history until OUR CENTURY, girls 12 years old were already getting married and starting families, and the (often much older) men they married didn't have people running around pointing and calling them pedophiles. It was the norm. In the human psyche, no matter what society tells us, males will respond to females who present them with "fresh, vital, full of life and fertile". It's simple instinct. In today's society it's not acceptable for men to be turned on by this because of the magical number "18" that has been imposed in the name of societal mores. I AGREE with that number being in place, I don't feel young girls in our society are ready to deal with more than they have already. HOWEVER, implying that men are pedophiles because they respond to/are attracted by youthful females, you are saying that it's human nature to be a pedophile. This is NOT the case. The definition of pedophile in the dictionary is:

pe·do·phile /ˈpidəˌfaɪl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[pee-duh-fahyl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun Psychiatry.
an adult who is sexually attracted to young children.
Also, pedophiliac.

PRE-PUBESCENT children are the scope of interest of TRUE pedophiles, once they sproud their little boobies and start gaining some shape, the TRUE pedophiles are NO LONGER INTERESTED. The real issue here isn't subscribing to pedophiles so much as it's catering to human nature. Sure, CP gets thrown into the mix and there ARE sickos who seek that stuff, but if we're goign to start hurling these kind of words, let's be REALISTIC about the reasons why people keep doing it. IT WORKS. Human nature/instinct has NOT evolved as quickly as our society has and no matter if society says it's wrong, it is still a part of the equation. I am in no way saying that marketing in this way is good, or that I agree with it.. However, it DOES work, and will CONTINUE to work, right or wrong, not because of a world full of PERVERTS, but because it's a world full of MEN who are just as subject to their own nature as they are the neccessity to breathe.

Not a single man here could tell me he hasn't looked, BY INSTINCT at an attractive underage girl. What he did with the thought process after that point is really all his own nature, but the fact that his brain DID make him take note even though HE CONSCIOUSLY KNOWS IT'S WRONG UNDER SOCIETY'S law, his instincts are still playing that role of procreator and looking for the best, freshest, healthiest candidates to carry his DNA into the next generation.

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by LadyMischief

* Have you ever hand-cropped thousands of thumbs? Just asking.

Yep, which is the reason I don't do much site building anymore. Done right, it can be intensely boring, tedious work and you spend long hours doing it even with tools helping. I used to thumb and crop the images, catalog the sets and images by niche Multi niche actually, (redhead:lesbian:strapon:etc), type (softcore, hardcore), whether they were sponsor provided or purchased, 2257 info, etc, on and on.

And this was to be able to put trustworthy automation in place.

But, if you choose to run tgp or even just do a shit load of galleries and free sites, to do it right is a big job and when you decide you are going to do it is when you should have agreed with yourself to do the work.

There is nothing wrong with attemting to automate and make your job easier, however, it does not remove responsibility.

Old saying from my Navy days: You can delegate authority, you cannt delegate responsibility.

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by LadyMischief

Not a single man here could tell me he hasn't looked, BY INSTINCT at an attractive underage girl. What he did with the thought process after that point is really all his own nature, but the fact that his brain DID make him take note even though HE CONSCIOUSLY KNOWS IT'S WRONG UNDER SOCIETY'S law, his instincts are still playing that role of procreator and looking for the best, freshest, healthiest candidates to carry his DNA into the next generation.

The thumbs I saw appeared to be prepubescent, I would have put them in the 8 year old area. And I have 2 daughters so I do know the difference between prepubescent and teen.

These did not bring up the instinct of I want to reproduce with that, it brought up the image of anyone who destroys that innocence should be shot and damn, that girl is scared shitless of what that asshole is about to do.