Jump to content

bear

Level 2 Member
  • Content count

    3,444
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

bear last won the day on June 29

bear had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

33 Excellent

About bear

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

2,942 profile views
  1. bear

    Transfer syncing in WHMCS

    I know this doesn't help, but "permenantly" in their code has a typo. Should be "permanantly", with an "a". 😉 The failed is for when the registrar can't complete the transfer and gives up. Domain locked, didn't get the auth from the owner and so on.
  2. This was posted previously:
  3. Wonder if they'd allow an account transfer if you could find a buyer... Might be worth trawling the terms, but since there is no reseller type accounts...I can't think of anything that would prevent it.
  4. Good grief. If you don't mind my asking, why would you put that much money all at once into something like that?
  5. Is it quite a lot of money? If not, I'd consider using it to buy renewals for my own names, or SSL (if you need any of those), or something to use it up. You might consider keeping only your own domains there until the funds are used, and move all client domains off now. Bitcoins not wasted, clients not getting solicited, I'd call that a win.
  6. Hmmm... https://whois.icann.org/en/accuracy This all refers to the 2013 change that had everyone needing to verify contacts on changes. In that: I suppose accuracy could possibly be having it set to the working email of the one managing the domain (see first quote), but this has always meant (at least to me as explained from major registrars) the owner is the registrant and the info has to be theirs in case of dispute and so on. The one managing the name, in the case of us providers, would be listed under tech or admin contacts... Dodgy to make it your own, if not disallowed. Interesting, but most RFCs and documentation read like stereo instructions. 😉
  7. Can't say I agree it would be allowed. Privacy masks public whois, but not the underlying data, which represents the actual owner, and it's to that address these go. Though I fully agree with the sentiment, it's not ok to do, no matter how you attempt it. You can ASK the domain owner if it's ok to have your info in it (tell them it's spam prevention?), but they have to agree. Preferably in writing. If you just do it, regardless of intent, and it gets back to the registrar and they complain to ICANN...well.... Then again, Namecheap suggested I do exactly that. I can't imagine that's the best way forward. Moving would be, IMHO.
  8. You should probably consider moving your domains there and drop Namecheap. The only way they will ever get the message is if they lose a lot of business over it, but they don't seem to be after reseller type users anyway. Odds are they're happy as is and won't ever change.
  9. It is definitely against their rules, since the registrant (which is the legal owner) gets to decide what address to use, and they mandated that the information be up to date and accurate as well. You having your own info in there defeats that because it's not the owner's info.
  10. It's been discussed there plenty. The rep basically said the same thing as support. -ICANN makes us do that -There are no reseller accounts -We're looking into having actual reseller accounts (years later, no movement) They won't change this, no matter how many "resellers" complain.
  11. More yes than no. It's not about them sending reminders (I get that, and it's not the issue), it's what's ALSO in that reminder that I take umbrage with. They are not obligated to include direct renewal links, nor upselling offers. That's purely voluntary and predatory, IMHO. They refuse to entertain the creation of true reseller accounts, in order to continue this practice; again, a deliberate and conscious decision.
  12. They absolutely do understand. We can't be the only two customers that have explained that they are causing confusion and attempting to poach business from us. The disregard for that along with domain ownership rights (by suggesting I change all registrant and admin emails to my own) shows they just don't care to change. We did a transfer for a new handed off client recently, and the email that arrived to say the transfer completed had offers for SSL certs, hosting and more in it. Had a client confused by the email about renewing, and reached out to support via the handy link NC puts in the reminder. They said the domain was in someone else's account (mine, as the person that sold it to them) so they can't allow them to access/renew it, then suggested they create their own account and have it pushed there, where they could then help and "oh by the way, we can offer cheap hosting", too. We're working on getting our customers off there, but have had trouble finding any registrar that's decent. Thought we'd found one recently, and during signup was linked to the terms. In it was a clause that stated they don't guarantee any domain reaching expiry will have *ANY* grace period (if they decide to give one, it's 14 days) and may be made available to someone wanting it immediately when it expires. We canceled the signup. Our customers are human, and occasionally late in renewing, so that won't do. Still looking.
  13. Change registrars to one that offers an actual reseller account which allows you to brand and edit content in those reminders. Namecheap will never stop that practice. I've been complaining about this for a long while, and they use two excuses: "We don't offer reseller accounts, so we're allowed to send what we like" "ICANN forces us to send these reminders, we have no choice" When I point out ICANN is not telling them to advertise competing services in those emails, they go quiet. My favorite one was they suggested (and provided detailed instructions on how) I mass edit all domains in my account to use my own email instead of the owner's email.
  14. Can't fully agree there, about "no truly noticeable additional value", if you take into account all the years the price has remained about the same. They simplified managing a server to the point where anyone would potentially be able to manage one, for the most part. A price increase was long overdue. The nature of this increase/change, and the excuse of "more powerful servers" and so on is the part I can't get behind. This needed to be more gradual, more incremental, and not account based, except maybe in larger blocks. I'd read somewhere they also increased the requirements to become a NOC partner, further reducing the small players options. Reminds me of Enom's changes.
  15. Not before being forced into it by this monumental and incredibly unwelcome change, no. While we do need the ability to track and review the number of accounts created, we are doing limited tiers now, to reduce surprises. Being able to see how many accounts a reseller has created in their account would help us track trends.
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Guidelines and understand your posts will initially be pre-moderated