| 3:00 pm on Sep 26, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I'm not certain what you mean by "most domains". How large was your sample set?
Why would privacy be maintained for some, but not all, domains? Do you see a pattern?
Are the "unmasked domains" parked? Nothing would surprise me less than feed providers FINALLY requiring that ALL domains "on their feed" NOT conceal their registration details, that they have complete and accurate details, etc.
Requiring unmasked domains, with accurate contact/registrant info that matches up to the traffic-payee, would be one more step in reducing the amount of click fraud and abuse.
[edited by: Webwork at 4:31 am (utc) on Sep 27, 2011]
| 10:13 pm on Sep 26, 2011 (gmt 0)|
A recently purchased a domain where WhoIs info was blocked. Now its open to public.
I then checked 2 domains that I privately purchased and realized my contact info public on Domain Tools.
So I guess my sample set is small buy hey it worked for me. I did 2 other searches just now and got the info I was looking for over a year :)
I probably shouldnt have said Most Domains, cause I simply did a quick search on 4-5 domains. I then checked CNN and a few other popular sites and noticed they were blocked, hence why I assumed "most domains"
Has anyone else realized a similar pattern?
| 10:34 pm on Sep 26, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I have privacy on all my domains ( a substantial number )..and domain tools still shows ( 10 of them ..I stopped after checking 10 of them*..there are 4 figures ) as private..
Even those with a "feed" ( which are not parked )..and those which are parked ( with a "feed" ), the "feed" suppliers in the two "feed" situations are not the same ..
I can only assume that the situation you find, vis a vis.. your domains, relates to the particular privacy service that you use ..and that used by the domains you were "researching" for over a year ( you may in fact share the same "privacy" services ) ..If I were you ( and also if I were the owners of the domains you are researching ) I would change "privacy" services.
IME "feed" services require "contact details" on site ..they do not require details of actual ownership.
*Better things to do ..and I suspect that many enquiries from the same IP within a short space of time would result in a temporary IP ban..
| 3:38 am on Sep 27, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Too small a sample to sound the alarm.
Maybe try banging on the door of your private registration provider?
| 6:25 pm on Sep 27, 2011 (gmt 0)|
thanks guys, that might be the case. I registered my domains with GoDaddy. I logged in my GoDaddy account and the few domains are marked as private however, its public info now! not that I really care, I had registered the names a few years ago and thought privacy was important at that time, never mind that I now realized is non-existent.
| 11:02 am on Sep 28, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Private has to be renewed annually ( for a fee ) at godaddy..if you didn't renew your privacy option it will have reverted to public.
| 4:36 am on Sep 29, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Yes I know. I had purchased Privacy for several years.
Domain Tools works fine however I noticed this morning that when I do a search for the mentioned websites I get the following error:
This webpage is not available
The webpage at [whois.domain...] tools .com/example.com might be temporarily down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address.
Error 330 (net::ERR_CONTENT_DECODING_FAILED): Unknown error.