have domain, will travel

[lucy24]

So a few days ago a thread somewhere in this general neighborhood inspired me to do some snooping. I discovered that the domain name "www.google-plays-silly-buggers.com" * was just sitting there, free as the air, where "free" = your basic $9.95. So naturally, having no willpower, I registered it.

Now I've got this domain with a goofy name just sitting there waiting for me to populate it with bright ideas. Hm. Where did I leave that screenshot offering me good deals on The Letter A? And can I get them to repeat their insistence that when I searched for "umiarjuap" I must have meant "marijuana"?** Good screenshot fodder there too.

What else would be fun to do? I'm thinking silliness, not malice. F'rinstance, I'll have to repeat at least one page from my real site just so I can name the page Duplicate Content ;)


* Moderators, put away the scissors. I have changed the name.

** Earlier today I searched for the name Tfinkdji. (Real name. Real person. Not a typo. The cat did not contribute a single letter.) g### was so flummoxed, they forgot to ask if I meant Zwieback.

[Webwork]

Ahhh . . . I see. You've been violating the Fundamental Rules of Domaining.

Specifically, Rule 3.2(a), that states:

It is the duty of a professional domainer to hide ALL keyboards BEFORE ingesting a hallucinogenic substance.

There are only two exceptions to registering domains in violation of Rule 3.2(a). Either you A) Use a false name, a stolen credit card, a private registration service, and a registrar headquartered in Elbonia; or, B) You blame all such bizarre activity on your cat.

[ken_b]

I had no idea that so many domainers owned so many cats that ingested hallucinogenic substances, especially on such an apparently regular basis.

But that does explain a lot.

[lucy24]

Well, dang. I thought I'd gone above and beyond by simply reading the Forum Charter. I noticed in particular that you're not allowed to venture editorial comments about domain name squatting.

I guess that means I'm not allowed to share my recent insight that name squatters are the present millennium's equivalent of the Indo-European dragon as analyzed by Calvert Watkins.* His thesis is that the IE dragon (Asian dragons are different) interfered with the smooth operation of society by taking valuables out of circulation-- the dragon's hoard-- thereby hampering the practice of gift-giving as a social lubricant (see any random episode of the Iliad, or the Sanskrit verse form explicitly called the dânastuti). Hence the need to kill the dragon and recover its hoard.

The analogy is obvious. But I guess I'm not allowed to say so. Darn it all.


* "How to Kill a Dragon in Indo-European", 1987, part of a Festschrift for some guy I've never heard of.