Looking at the .feedback page for Stack Overflow, it says at the top, in fairly large letters "We make Stack Overflow, where the world's developers get answers, share knowledge & find jobs they love. Also proud builders of the @stackexchange Q&A network."
Then at the absolute bottom, in small, washed out print it says "Disclaimer: This site is provided to facilitate free speech regarding Stack Overflow. No direct endorsement or association should be conferred."
So, users are not supposed to confer that a page claiming to be by the makers of stack overflow, are associated with SO? Beyond any reasonable doubt, the people behind that site are trying to scam visitors.
If the creators of the .feedback pages are also the TLD owners, it seems obvious to me that they should face legal charges and be stripped of the TLD.
Yes, pretty clearly trademark infringement IMO. Confusingly similar, their websites purport to be run by the very organizations they're trying to extort. The disclaimer is IMO not sufficiently clear.
SO is humorously classified as a "local business". NYC HN-ers, could you drop by the SO offices and ask a Python question for me? I keep getting these `ImportError`s...
Dan Manny says:
Stack over flow made me loose money!!! Bad code with security wholes in it crashed my clients site!! Warning warning for scammers
and Antonio B. of Indonesia says:
Best site for solving programming issue!!!11!one!
The most user and newbie friendly site!
11/10 would recommend
You know you can trust reviews like this!
Is there a word for the feeling you get when you see 15+ year old idiot message board / forum / usenet catchphrases apparently still going strong?
It's a curious mix of nostalgia and revulsion.
I guess they meant that not every compound word is one that Germans actually use (as you would expect when somebody claims "it's a German word"). But you can totally make up words on the spot that every German will understand
> You fucking moron!!! You lost money because you were so stupid and not being able to differentiate bad code from good code. StackOverflow is not you free personal assistant. You should kill yourself for being so stupid.
Also, the domains you suggested are quite different from the current situation. A site like myfeedbacksite.com/google is clearly not owned or operated by Google. Very few people would be confused. Whereas a site named google.feedback is far more confusing. Not sure anyone would know if it's an official Google site or not.
They are showing up for many brand searches.
It's another issue altogether that should be dealt with legally.
Plus it also looks decently designed and not like an easy to spot scam. I could easily see the average, non tech-savvy users fall for that.
If people did something as simple as confirming the domain listed in the address bar is the site they should be on, we would see a major decrease in malware, but alas the situation continues.
If they have no audience, they can be safely ignored. No reason to pay $600/yr for hypotheticals.
All I meant was, the moment someone brings up a .feedback domain or "Google's new feedback service," just let them know it's a scam and move on.
Trying to scam google over $600 feels like a poor strategy for a scam that depends on being discovered.
I imagine they will follow the Yelp scam model - post bad reviews against smaller companies, out so them, and charge to remove the malicious information.
There is no shortage of suckers in the world - as the old saying goes, there's one born every minute.
whois stackoverflow.feedback returns a phone number with a CNAM of STACK OVERFLOW, and the same address listed on https://stackoverflow.com/company/contact
whois google.feedback returns the phone number +1.1978600872, which is not a valid US area code last I checked. The address appears to be a PO box in Seattle.
facebook.feedback has the same bogus phone number and the same PO box as google.feedback.
myaccount.feedback (where they send you if you try to vote on anything, presumably other things too) has a residential address on Mercer Island, WA and a Google Voice number listed.
Calling the Google Voice number results in a voicemail where a person identifies themselves as "Jay" (presumably Jay Westerdal of Top Level Spectrum, Inc who owns the .feedback TLD)
Another thing of interest is that myaccount.feedback encourages you to login with Google/Facebook/Twitter/LinkedIn
> ICANN's core values are creativity, innovation, and respect the flow of information. The .Feedback registry is innovating and following those core values by allowing transparency with an independent review system that can be operated by anyone willing to sponsor a name. The .Feedback domain is different from all the other registries. It is human nature to fear change and innovation, this registry doesn't want to be in the business of selling just DNS domains like every other registry. We want to innovate!
(Innovation my ass...)
Also2, this seems to be the official page for the operation:
EDIT: Jay seems to be a big fish in the industry, so this is somewhat surprising.
> I would like to add that IMHO all new TLDs are scam. Brand owners are forced to register their name in many of them.
.feedback is just the tip of the iceberg.
I think this is the core issue here. I remember that a few of ICANN's new TLDs caused similar issues. The idea of selling TLDs to companies for use at their discretion is horrible enough, but they also seem to be completely ignorant of this problem.
This feels as if ICANN is trying to become the new FIFA.
(I don't really have much empathy for google etc having to pay $600 a year, but the same problem could also hit lots of small sites. Also with the current trend, TLDs seem to loose all structure and meaning and just turn into another brand vehicle or trade asset)
The conclusion was that both currently-fashionable arguments were kinda bogus: the new gTLDs couldn't deal with 'artificial scarcity' in any real sense, if it even existed, and yet few brand owners were defensively registering in the existing domains (even .org) so claims that it would extract massive economic rent were also overblown.
It was eventually published in the Journal of Information Policy (vol.3, pp.464-484). There's a full-text copy on https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:ba4ca100-2f81-43ea-b207-84... if anyone's interested...
I recall .blog being purchased by Automattic for 15-20M (that being just 1 example).
ICANN is to tech what the SEC is to finance: A corporate revolving-door where you join to do your corporate-masters bidding and then move back to your 7-figure job.
Is that even how it works in the SEC?
Some examples where he has written about this issue:
I'm 90% sure that the entire concept of the feedback form/widget is only still with us as a way of channeling user rage into non-social platforms. "Here, complain into this void that won't hurt our public opinion!"
The company behind this (1), has .realty .forum .contact .pid and .observer and all the "sell" pages lookalike. Holy fuck this looks dirty.
On an amusing note, the pages barely load for me. Could this be the first time the HN hug of death took down a whole TLD?
The GTLD system is a pretty poor compromise between those two positions. User's don't have freedom of the early DNS system, and brands now have a huge enforcement burden to mange. Registering sites like coca-cola.fun and coca-cola.shopping are almost certainly not allowed, and will be shut-down eventually, but it now costs Coke a sizable sum to monitor and take down the infringing websites.
I understand a lot of other scams. (Not condone, but I see the attraction of running it.) This one just seems like a lot of work to put into something that I really don't see the targeted companies choosing to go along with. Seems like borrowing a ton of grief - at the very least, they'll be hearing from a bunch of crabby lawyers.
I'd love to see NewEgg get involved in this. They have a history of going after patent and other legal trolls for the sole purpose of discouraging that type of behaviour. 
Sadly, it seems no one has bothered to register newegg.feedback...
For those that don't know, GetSatisfaction is/was a 'user support' site designed for users of a particular app/service to provide support to each other - only the fact that it wasn't an official support page was not immediately obvious. They had a line somewhere on the page that said something like "We hope that a support rep from the company will chime in on these threads" but not much else.
People ended up getting extremely frustrated with the companies in question, believing that the company was ignoring them when questions went unanswered.
To their credit, I think they changed things and made the situation clearer when several companies lambasted them on social media, but I don't know that they ever fully recovered and became as popular as they were before that.
Another possibility is that the site is trying to give the impression big companies are paying so when they go after small fry it'll go easier on them.
Source: whois & it's hosted on a CL server
Interestingly, their CEO has claimed that .feedback is 'UDRP proof', which is laughable if you are at all familiar with the way in which the system has worked in the past:
I'm always surprised how few people in the software industry know anything about the UDRP, especially in light of some of its incredibly questionable decisions over the years, and the huge impact it can have on a software business. It's pretty interesting as one of the few large scale examples of a privatized court system, and also one of the only globally enforceable trademark systems ever conceived (thanks to ICANN's total control of the DNS system), much to the annoyance of many non-US governments.
Okay, IANAL, but that probably is not true.
Well, at least not in that way. They could for example, sell the .feedback domain to company owners, in regards that owner can either enable or disable user-given feedback.
Else, they could run the .feedback domain that point for a specific company, and nothing stops them, reason is pretty clear - it's their TLD, and if they got approved by ICANN, then nothing stops them in illegal way (copyright infringement are as powerful as ICANN is).
(Except in advertising, right?)
I have no legal training, but regularly review lengthy legal contracts and discuss them with lawyers, and tiny changes in wording can have huge implications in what they mean.
Outside of legal contracts, many agreements (such as an agreement over email, or even verbal) can be considered legally binding, and so could be affected similarly when it comes to wording.
An example away from contracts (written or otherwise): salesmen and bribing. "I'd like you to buy my company's product, let me take you to an expensive restaurant to discuss the opportunity" is fine (roughly, in some cases and depending on the monetary value of the meal it might be against company policy or in some cases even illegal, but usually fine), vs. "If you buy my company's product I will take you to an expensive restaurant" which isn't fine. (Speaking from experience, having a) had plenty of experience on both sides of the sales table, including being specifically offered bribes and including being "client entertained" including some cases where I couldn't accept even though it would have been legally not considered bribery, and also from the experience of having to write, and enforce, anti-bribery / anti-corruption company policies.)
An example of what I'm talking about is the difference between gifts and loans. Say you're applying for a mortgage, and I give you $50k as a gift. Sure, you can use that as a down payment. But if I make you agree to pay the $50k "gift" back as a condition, it's not a gift, it's a loan, and calling it a gift is mortgage fraud. No matter how you word it, you can't change a loan into a gift.
Just like with extortion. Extortion is an act, and you can carefully word it all you want, but it doesn't change the fact of extortion, but it may make it easier or more difficult to prove.
But I'm not trying to say something especially deep here, just that it's common for people to look at the language of the law and believe that they can avoid consequences by rewording a few things.
Pay for the 'employer branding' package way more than 600/year (rather per month) and you get rid of the worst employee feedbacks.
A bit late to call party foul when absurd tlds are available more and more. Ocean of piss and all that. Embrace the chaos.
Looks like they got some great feedback.
There's precedent for getting a domain based on trademark from someone else.
This is an exception. It'd be great in theory, but the preregistered scam domains are absolutely ridiculous.
I hope the likes of Google and Facebook come down on these sites, and come down on them hard.
I dunno, between tobacco companies, oil companies, and the earlier thongs pretty much every major industry did that stimulated the labor movement from the 19th Century into the early 20th, these guys are small fry. Capitalism gives capitalism a bad name.
 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14669058
as much as i appreciate the arguments for why that is the case, its important to recognise the cost of that philosophy in practice
still i hope there is some legal action that comes against them.
cdn.feedback serves up this on an otherwise empty html doc:
<!-- There's only one rule that I know of, babies - God damn it, you've got to be kind -->
Corporate-driven lawsuit for trademark violation?
HTTP/1.1 302 Found
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 16:59:36 GMT
Server: Apache/2.4.18 (Ubuntu)
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
.info is the furthest I'd go. At a push. I'll also still click on ".google" and other reputable corp vanity domains if the content appears on HN and looks interesting enough.
I wanted to correct a few facts.
First, while it has been reported that Registry pre-registered 5,000 domains this is incorrect. We have not registered the sites you mentioned. You can check the whois and look up the owners.
Second, The pricing referenced is out of date and not accurate. Prices can be found as low as $5 for a .feedback domain. Check out Crazydomains.com
Well, that's fine then. It's totally ethical to fleece people as long as you're not fleecing them /too much/.
If StackOverflow did actually register stackoverflow.feedback I would understand the WHOIS data, but then I don't understand the purpose of the following disclaimer:
"Disclaimer: This site is provided to facilitate free speech regarding Stack Overflow. No direct endorsement or association should be conferred."
That disclaimer seems to imply that StackOverflow didn't register the domain. Care to explain why the WHOIS data says otherwise?
edit: Okay, I guess it is a pretty messed up website. If you go to reply to something, it gives you the ability to "officially" reply (as, say Google) for a mere $29 per message. This doesn't seem like extortion, but it is a pretty horrible business idea.
Mate, that is 100% confusing to anyone on the internet.
Especially more so now that google uses their own TLD for some of their blogs/services. So `blog.google` is google. `google.com` is google, but `google.feedback` isn't. Please explain...
Is google.reddit.com 100% confusing to anyone on the internet too?