One of my office colelagues referred me to FlyerTalk at work but when I checked the first time, I wnet to Flyertalk.net by mistake instead of FlyerTalk.Com and got some kind of 'stevo the world traveler' thing instead. Is this stevo affiliated with this site as it seems like he si making use of the Flyertalk domain name.

He is a regular poster on flyertalk but it is not directly linked to Flyertalk per se. He is making use of the name.

according to some one here that would make that site "affiliated" with FT.. is it?

Nope. The only "affiliation" is the gentleman who owns the domain happens to also be a member of FT.

With all the domain suffixes available nowadays, "affiliation by similarity" really isn't a reasonable conclusion now like it was when it was just .com, .net, and .org.

Good question sierelekne.

Answer is quite simple - no mystery to anyone here. I own that domain, and have done for years. I actually used to call and head my extensive travel blog webpage "FlyerTalk" even before I found this site, so it was a natural name to choose.

It has been very openly listed on my profile as my FT webpage for a couple of years:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/member.php?userid=2922

Randy is fully aware of it, and I feel sure is happier a FT'er has it for a harmless travel blog site, than a bulletin board competitor to his business owning it.

I suggested to Randy years back he might care to think about registering www.Flyertalk.aero and www.Flyertalk.info but he seemed happy keeping the prime domain name. Someone is Britain seems to own the www.Flyertalk.us name.

I bet Northwest Airlines would like to own Northwest.com or Northwest.net and I imagine Lufthansa might prefer to own www.moremiles.org that is another travel Bulletin board, that must be mixed up with www.moremiles.com.

I've been on FT five years and once upon a time many of us had email addresses we could use like [email protected] but IIRC that feature went away in some update or overhaul or upgrade in the past.

Anyway, I like using that Flyertalk.net email address for signing up with airlines and hotels for promos etc, and can readily see if the email addresses are on-sold or re-used by others. i.e. [email protected] or [email protected] etc

Glen

FlyerTalk 'Oz Fest #2' in Sydney May 27/29, 2005. Click for details

Thank you for the explanatoin.

Who would make a bet that sierelekne is NOT a second user ID of some long-time poster or someone posting on behalf of a long-time poster? It is rather improbable that a new poster would post exclusively in the ORP forum.

Also, it is not a very credible claim that someone would check a .net domain before checking a .com domain.

If not - sierelekne, welcome to Flyertalk. The search function is currently working. If you used it, you could probably find one of your previous posts where you addressed the issue.

I'd bet my house on it actually:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showp...&postcount=118

The almost childish attempt to use bad spelling on 6 from 7 posts to hopefully deflect identity, has not fooled anyone in my view when you read the post linked above from this same Troll defending "Fare Alert" email "List" with all his might - perfectly typed on that one though.

If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is a ........ @:-)

This thread subject has indeed been wheeled out before by one long term member. I mention www.flyertalk.com on my travel blog which is a plug for Randy, so not sure why this person seems so obsessed??

Heck, it is not as if I have a link there pan-handling for Pay Pal donations or anything like that from visitors to my site.


Glen

FlyerTalk 'Oz Fest #2' in Sydney May 27/29, 2005. Click for details

Amazing. Simply amazing.

Well, I guess the only shred of credibility I can find late in this thread is that one of the participants doing the most accusing has actually admitted to registering and posting under multiple handles.

It's amazing that the same behaviour and MO (attacking and insinuating that others are doing exactly what one has done wrong) continues almost 5 years later.

The duck has been quacking away for 5 years, and I would not bet that house--the glass will be broken when a stone is thrown back.

Really? (http://www.flyertalk.net/order.html for those who missed the irony).

I changed my thoughts on the glass house. Bet it. Quickly.

Thank you for the welcome. I was away for a few days and did not see your reply to offer my thoughts over the matter. I am unsure what you mean by 'your previous posts', did you mean another person,, or?

No, I think you are a well-known poster and "sierelekne" is an obvious fake profile. And you have done this before.

Wow, I had no idea that the stamps in ozstamps was because he sold stamps.

I never bothered to go to that site before

I don't know, I usually don't confuse entering .net instead of .com

You should see what happened when I went to whitehouse.com instead of whitehouse.gov

All this talk about duck has made me hungry.

Do I have anything to say, not really, it's just Deja Vu all over again.

Nice to see that we are always consistent

I guess your welcome was not as warm as originally I read it to be.

Well, it is unsual for someone to go directly to ORP and start making accusations.

But if it helps, Welcome to FT (again, maybe :-P)

Likewise, usps.com vice usps.gov .

Since then, those pornographic rogue sites, obviously intending to capitalize on mistaken hits, have been shut down, and are examples of the phenomenon known as "cyber-squatting."

On the other hand, sometimes pre-existing organizations with bonafide interests in a domain have also been forced to relinquish their website. The loss of a Catholic convent to a pop star known as Madonna comes to mind.

If the holder of a similar website was using it before a more popular website ever came to be -- or registered it preemptively to prevent hostile use, if there is no reasonable possibility of confusion, and no profiting at the expense of the major website, or if the owner of the larger institution is not concerned about the other site, why should we make an issue of it?

I do find it somewhat interesting that the anti-duplicate-handle provision in the Terms of Service does not seem to be uniformly enforced. Don't we have a super-moderator, other than the owner, in this forum?