Earlier today, domain news publication DNN.com published an article by Adam Strong, titled “NamePros.com Gets Outed In Browser History Sniffing Fiasco“.
Our first note: Camel Casing in titles – capitalizing the first letter of every word – is old school and very outdated. Emphasis should be achieved by constructing better titles instead.
In the article, DNN discusses how popular domainer forum, NamePros.com is included in a report referred to by a ZDnet article, which examined the mechanisms of browser history sniffing.
The report included tests performed on web sites among the top 50,000 on the Internet, according to Alexa.com ratings. NamePros.com commands an Alexa ranking of 2,966 worldwide – a great feat. By comparison, DNJournal.com – the top domaining publication – has an Alexa ranking of 13,512 which means less traffic. Both numbers are 3-month averages.
While the DNN.com article title talks about NamePros being “outed”, the article discusses YouPorn and a pending lawsuit related to privacy concerns. Thus, immediately after clicking on the headline, readers expecting to read about NamePros and its alleged “outing” are presented with references to lawsuits and porn, unrelated to NamePros.
DNN fails to mention that the University of California study report, in which NamePros.com is included, actually explains the type of activity that those web sites listed engaged into. On page 9 of the PDF file of the study, NamePros is listed with an older Alexa ranking of 3508 and the indicator “F” under the Source column.
According to the report conducted by students of the Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of California, in San Diego, the “F” mark means NamePros.com is using javascript tracker code generated by the web site Feedjit.com – a free tracker and traffic analysis web site with 500,000 active participants – of which NamePros.com is the #2 destination after Feedjit.com itself.
Unlike YouPorn that is under scrutiny for actually sniffing visitors’ browsing history with code local to their web site, NamePros is using a traffic analyzer akin to Google Analytics. Simply put, there is no malicious code on the NamePros.com web site, as the article seems to imply.
In the DNN article, Adam Strong prequels the NamePros reference with yet another reference to YouPorn and the pending lawsuit, as follows:
The plaintiffs in the case claim YouPorn is violating the U.S. Computer Fraud and Abuse Act as well as California computer laws as well as deceptive and unfair business practices and competition. DNN is not sure what NamePros.com was involved in or wether it was similar activity to what YouPorn.com is now being sued over. We suspect that NamePros was using scripts from an ad network and was caught up in what looks like a privacy-witch-hunt.
Ron James, the well-known NamePros domainer that operates the forum responded to the DNN article, disclaiming any use of a mechanism to intentionally track or disrupt the browsing habits of the NamePros.com users:
I understand the need to boost ratings, but your “NamePros Gets Outted” headline smacks of overly-sensational journalism. […]
[…] Feedjit is a traffic stats program we have been using as an alternative to Google Analytics. I have never gotten any kind of access to a user’s browsing history through this service or any others. The stats are in real time, but are otherwise fairly usual. […]
[…] Is our choice of stats program is really that newsworthy? If so, I look forward to being “outted” on my choice of domain registrar or what hosting company we use for our servers. […]
While privacy matters are of extreme importance, accuracy of information and release of the details that make a difference is necessary, when tagging a popular destination for domainers as being “outed”. At the same time, simultaneous reference to pornography and lawsuits might generate more pageviews but it’s factually unrelated to the reason of including NamePros.com in the University study and report.
Copyright © 2025 DomainGang.com · All Rights Reserved.Comments
7 Responses to “Porn, browser history tracking and post title fiasco”Leave a Reply
-
-
-
-
-
DomainGang provides daily entertainment and parody content for the domain industry! Articles that contain the “100% True” notice are entirely true – but still fun to read. Follow us, and learn more about the wonderful world of domaining!
-
> Camel Casing in titles – capitalizing the first letter of every word
Unfortunately, camel casing does not mean this; it means inserting a capital letter in the midst of a compound word – like MasterCard
As they say:
> accuracy of information … is necessary
Also,
> is old school
Some of us like to kick it old Skool
Jeff – While Camel Casing requires the lack of spacing (as in compound words, as you mentioned) it’s also used, as a term, to identify the capitalization of every word in titles, when it’s done for no reason other than emphasis.
I missed the feedjit mention in the report and readily admitted that, even changing the text in the article prior to reading your post. Without seeing that fact I could only speculate, giving the benefit of the doubt to Ron, that it wasn’t clear “wether it was similar activity to what YouPorn.com is now being sued over.” and “We suspect that NamePros was using scripts from an ad network and was caught up in what looks like a privacy-witch-hunt.”
As for the assertion that I put the lawsuit and porn site mention in the article for page views all I can say is that you’re wrong. The topic of porn and lawsuits is what the original source article covered. The article we cited mentioned Namepros along side the other sites doing browser history sniffing and it’s how we found about the study. That topic was brought up since both sites have been identified in the same study and now one is being sued over the activity. Since YouPorn is being sued over an activity similar to what feedjit is doing through the namepros code I felt it was relevant. I can’t see how it isn’t.
If you read all of this as a way to drum up page views, I would think you would know that I surely failed miserably in any sort of attempt to do so. With your expertise in this area, you would know there are far more sensational headlines and ways to have written this particular article to make that happen. You should also realize, unlike this site, I have little to gain from creating any sort of controversy and increasing page views in the manner that you are portraying. It’s actually counter-productive. I’m sorry you didn’t like the way I presented the story but there was no personal gain from the manner in which you find offensive.
Adam – In your response to Ron James you stated that your reference to “outing” was simply stating the facts. Somehow, I don’t find the strategic placement of references to YouPorn and its pending litigation as mere stating of the facts. While it might not have been intentional, it definitely delivered the effect of tying NamePros to the above two references, none of which has any direct relation to the incident.
In other words, NamePros is not related to pornography or any lawsuits, but by referencing YouPorn and the lawsuit alongside with NamePros you establish the notion that they are somehow related.
Furthermore, the report’s identification of the culprit being external (Feedjit) versus local (as in the YouPorn case) signifies that indeed it’s more of a witch-hunt (as you stated) and not an indication of wrong-doing. The end result is obviously the stirring of controversy based on an inconclusive report, combined with lack of details and an unrelated lawsuit (YouPorn). There is no “outing” per se, as if Ron James were caught tapping into users’ browsing history – and this is not the case here.
Now I know why we have not heard or seen Chef Patrick…
http://www.leics.police.uk/canyouhelp/missing/88_joseph_brooks/
Viva NamePros!
p.s. thanks for not spying
This article could have been titled, “DNN deliberately libels Namepros, lawsuit to follow, but feedjit still su cks”. Guns, again you are 100 per cent correct regardless of the lame excuse DNN offers in the comments above.