[charles_kaw]

>Im not sure you read or understand the links correctly so let me clarify.

I did in fact.

>Sure we could split hairs

That is literally, LITERALLY the whole point of if they are "flaunting rules" or not. You said they were flaunting rules. According to those links you posted, it turns out they are not flaunting the rules. Your statement is false, your language imprecise. These things matter.

Were their actions distasteful? Sure. But they were in accordance with the rules.

[unknownaccount]

How is preventing a person from transferring out their domain + setting it to expire quickly effectively any different from outright cancelling a persons domain immediately? The end result is the same. Sure there is a technical distinction in the WHOIS but I can see how a court could find it to be the same thing in spirit(and thus, a violation of the ICANN-registrar agreement)

[smoldesu]

When you sign up for Namecheap, you are acknowledging that they can change their TOS at any time and can effectively revoke ownership of any domain you own at-will. This is the same for pretty much everyone, unless you're buying straight from ICANN.

[charles_kaw]

>I can see how a court

Wild and unbased speculation. In fact, there have been lawsuits around de-platforming that haven't gone well for the plaintiff - I can't imagine a more cut and dry scenario would make it easier :)

>Sure there is a technical distinction in the WHOIS

Now you're getting it.