mike/

@Porkbun Y’all are the best!

@miketxt Should be live now :)

@Porkbun hello! I had a question regarding Handshake names… are you still accept new names? I submitted .ry and .ty a few months ago, but haven’t heard back. Just wanted to check if you still support them, thanks!

@Porkbun Thank you so much!

@miketxt Hello! Unfortunately we are not currently accepting new Handshake TLDs to sell on our site. That said, we are prone to making exceptions for friendly folks like yourself 😅 I'll take a peek at the request.

@InspinHQ For real! Sent me through an emotional rollercoaster 😂

@miketxt Amazing. The person doing the 100% blind bids had me going crazy.

By some miracle, I won the #HNS .mike/ auction! Super stoked and couldn’t be happier! Can’t wait to redirect it to my X profile 😎

@dynatodd Wanted to follow up on this as there still appears to be an error when searching for any 2 character .st domain. @Dynadot

@miketxt Two letter ST domains have higher pricing. We are fixing our code now. The previous two letter domains we registered we had to delete until we can fix the pricing

Dynadot just launched ST domains. São Tomé is an up and coming country in Africa with 3% economic growth a year. Only 50k domains in the entire zone, so lots of great domains still available. Some two letter ST domains were registered yesterday at regular pricing.

@dynatodd Amazing improvements so far. How difficult is it to onboard a new ccTLD registry/program? I bet this is a very unique experience per registry… Is there a goal to eventually offer most or all (functioning) ccTLDs? I’m still hoping to see .et and .bo on Dynadot one day 😅

What do you want us to work on in 2026? Almost all the features on Dynadot originated as customer requests. Some of the changes we made in 2025: - All customers get Superbulk pricing - Added support for Bitcoin and USDC (both payment and payout) - Launched NameClub. com - Launched about 30 TLDs (mostly ccTLDs) - Discounts for crypto, wire and direct debit payments - Major update of our phone APP (iOS and Android) - Improved our email and website add-ons (free with every domain) - Improved our free domain appraisal tool - Decreased server restart time to under 1 minute - Improved Afternic and Sedo listing integrations - Launched a state of the art RESTful version of our API

@dynatodd I took a guess and just sent an email to todd (at) dynadot (dot) com 😅 hope this is the correct email!

@miketxt You can email me your LinkedIn and I can forward it to the correct department

2025 was a solid year for Dynadot. Grew our domain count from 6m to 8.5m. Still privately held, allowing us to make long term decisions in the best interest of our customers and employees. Here are some milestones on our 23 year journey so far.

The Internet was designed to survive nuclear war. Today, one company going down can break half the Web. @Cloudflare isn’t the problem, centralization is. Handshake is the fix.

@katerleonid Satisfy.org

Up to $35,000 budget for one-word English dictionary domains. Extensions: .com / .ai / .org only 😇 Snagged is looking for these domains on behalf of a client. Do you have some?

@BettyAiProject @DancerA @dynatodd @webvisionusa @Dynadot I guess I should clarify, I agree with Todd’s point about it being unfair to the other 22 bidders, but disagree about the “market value” statement. Market value is only determined by what someone is willing to pay. I believe a re-auction is the most fair solution (currently).

@miketxt @DancerA @dynatodd @webvisionusa @Dynadot A hiccup? Seriously? That’s when you misspeak. This was a full-blown confession that the system is rigged to their own benefit, that’s not a slip, that’s a statement.

Here is the actual email that I sent to @dynatodd the CEO of @dynadot this morning at 7:46am PLEASE RETWEET! I tried to handle this quietly and professionally. But what’s happening at @Dynadot affects everyone in the domain industry. Their current auction policy rewards fake bidders and punishes real ones. I’m making my letter public so no one else gets burned. Hi Todd, I’m writing to you personally because I don’t want this to turn into a public spectacle. I’ve always tried to do business in good faith, and I’ve supported Dynadot for years. But the policy I’ve encountered here can destroy the very trust that keeps your company alive. In the auction for Coinbook.com, a bidder failed to pay. That means every bid that person made was invalid from the moment they clicked the button. Yet under Dynadot’s current policy, I’m being asked to pay the inflated price created by those fake bids. To put this in perspective, imagine a real estate auction where a home is bid up to $3.5 million and later it’s discovered that every bid above $1.5 million was phony. No auctioneer on earth would expect the legitimate bidder to pay $3.5 million. They’d be out of business before the crowd left the room. This is no different. You’re asking real bidders to pay against ghosts, while the platform still profits from the forfeited deposit of the bidder who never paid. It’s a double win for Dynadot and a breach of trust for everyone else. Even the appearance of that conflict of interest is poison to an auction business. If I said I was angry, it would be an understatement. Livid would be closer to the truth.  I was actually on a yacht that I chartered to be with some of the most influential domain investors in the industry when I heard the news and they heard and saw my reaction firsthand. Ask them. I hit the ceiling!! Worse: this policy protects no one but the fakers, the fake bids and all the abuse that goes with them. That will be devastating. Our industry isn’t huge, Todd. It’s small, tight, and built on reputation. The moment people realize this policy exists, they’ll lose confidence not just in this one auction, but in your entire system just like I did when I first learned of it. It’s a dealbreaker. It’s a trust breaker. It’s an ethics breaker. And it’s the kind of thing that can break a company. I’ve written a detailed public post explaining the situation not to attack you or Dynadot, but to explain how devastating this policy could be for Dynadot and for everyone who depends on you. I’d prefer not to share it. But if this can’t be resolved, I’ll have no choice but to make the issue public so that others can protect themselves. I’d rather see Dynadot do the right thing: revert this sale to the last legitimate bid, acknowledge the problem, and fix the policy going forward. You’ll earn more trust in one day than any marketing campaign could buy. Without those steps, tell me how is it possible to ever trust your platform again? How could I ever use Dynadot again? How could I ever recommend Dynafot again without explaining the unsavory policy that comes with it? Doing the right thing helps everyone. Your customers, your brand, and your future. Doing the wrong thing helps no one, not even in the short term, and the consequences are unknown. Thank you for your time, Todd. I truly hope you understand how serious and important this is. Best, Rick Schwartz #Domains #DomainNames #Auctions #DomainKing

@DancerA @dynatodd @BettyAiProject @webvisionusa @Dynadot This is an extremely fair point, and I believe the only “hiccup” in the response from Todd.

@dynatodd @BettyAiProject @webvisionusa @Dynadot “That didn't seem reflective of the market value, or seem fair to the 22 other bidders.” With all due respect it is the market that should determine the value of an item at auction - not the auctioneer!

Yep… my fiancée just brought up this same exact point. In the case of a “two bidders only” auction it may be good to have a fallback clause that says the final price is halved… something like that 😅 not sure the best way it could be handled. In the end, I’m thinking stricter verification, higher “failure to pay” fees, etc may be the solution.

@miketxt @dynatodd @BettyAiProject @webvisionusa @Dynadot x.com/aoxborrow/stat…

@dynatodd @BettyAiProject @webvisionusa @Dynadot Also, in this system, it would suck to be Bidder 3… but if you’re able to somehow determine that Bidder 3 was indeed a legitimate bidder, then Bidder 2 would get the offer to purchase at $40,000 🤷‍♂️

Would it make sense to take into account a second, legitimate bidders bid? Meaning, disregard all of the non-paying, winning bidders bids, then only account for the next two highest, legitimate bidder’s bids. Example (in the order of the final bids placed on the auction): For reference: Bidder 1: winning, non-paying bidder Bidder 2: legitimate bidder Bidder 3: legitimate bidder Bidding chain: Bidder 1: $50,000 Bidder 2: $49,000 Bidder 1: $48,000 Bidder 2: $47,000 Bidder 1: $46,000 Bidder 2: $40,000 Bidder 3: $39,000 Bidder 1: $38,000 Bidder 3: $37,000 Bidder 2: $33,000 etc etc etc In this system, the bids that the non-paying winning bidder made are disregarded up until there was another, third, legitimate bidder in the chain. So instead of the runner-up bidder having to pay the inflated price of $49,000, they would instead be offered to only pay $40,000 is it was the bid they made after the last other legitimate bidder’s top bid. This is a very rough idea, but I hope it makes sense… plus there may still be some gaps where people can abuse this system… just an idea 😅

@aoxborrow Real… definitely miss the simplicity of Google Domains. There is so much bloat in today’s registrars. GoDaddy is probably the worst offender when it comes to bloat, while I’d say Porkbun has the least.

I miss Google Domains. when you logged in, it just showed your domains. no stupid .ART offers, no BS.

@Aladey i♥.com

I♥️ Domains.

@aoxborrow @kingersoll 👀

ok who wants to be in on the pre-seed round for me and @kingersoll to build a modern registrar. extra points if you have "domain knowledge" and a spare ICANN accreditation.