It’s okay, but thank you for taking the time to figure out for me. That is, there is no way to solve it now? So if I keep renewing this domain name, can it always be used by me?
It’s really sad and desperate. Its management belongs to me, but the ownership does not belong to me.
No, you should let it expire and then re-register it, if you want ownership. If you keep renewing it, you remain the controller so in principle you can use it (but not own it) and I don’t know if that’s ideal or not (again, wait for someone else to confirm this)
Does this mean that there is never a way to get it out? So as long as I keep renewing, whether it is managed or not will always belong to me.
If I let it expire, someone else may come and register it with me, and then it may be snatched away by others. There’s a lot of risk here.
Of course. There’s definitely a risk of someone snipping it
At that point, my controller will also be lost.
Yes, correct. That’s true
It’s a tangled approach, and I think we’ll see if anyone else has the perfect solution.
Hi Holder.
First the good news: supposing this is you, it means you are still the controller of the name. You can set text records pointing it to any address you want, even the link. The only thing you can’t do is to transfer ownership to someone else, or change the controller.
This is not a case of a locked TLD.
The not so bad news is that I think it might be still possible to sort of recover the name. The ENS multisig should be capable of calling the registrar and setSubNodeOwner of the name into another address. I say sort of, because this would change the owner in ENS, not in the NFT itself.
The bad news is that the name will never be a fully working name. Since the registrar lacks the capability of calling the transfer function on itself, the multisig can never transfer ownership out, meaning that nobody can put it for sale on Open Sea, or show on their wallet. But on the other hand, since the registrar doesn’t have the capability of calling “reclaim” on itself either, it means once you set subnode owner to someone else, then it will not be able to reclaim it to the multisig again.
Now, would the Multisig Keyholders do this? Maybe. Doing any transaction on root is a complex scenario and involves time money and risks. Maybe they could be persuaded to do it for the poor spouse of Mikey Woodbridge, who accidentally sent his partner’s gift to the wrong address.
But honestly, KKK, is another situation. It is a politically charged name, and I thank you for having secured it and transferred it in a way that cannot ever be sold to some hate group. I’d hate to see ENS being used in such way. Seeing your history for me it’s clear that you are just a collector of triple names, not some white nationalist, and, depending where you’re from, you might not even have realized the history behind these particular letters. But still, it would be terrible to see you sell this particular name to some anonymous user that later used it to set up a pro-kkk decentralized website.
I suggest you use your power of controller of the name to set it up as some sort of anti-kkk information center, maybe with a donation address to relevant NGOs. Maybe this could win the sympathy of the multisig holders and increase the chance of them doing the change. Alternatively you can simply wait out the registration to end, at which point you’d have to bid on it like anyone else. But of course that might never happen, if someone else renews it.
3 Likes
Thank you so much for your wonderful elaboration, which makes me more respectful of the community.First of all, I want to clarify that I had never heard of the kkk party before I bought this ens name, and I personally prefer this three-letter domain name because there are only 26 in the world, and they are very rare.Secondly, you mean that if the multi-signature holder agrees, the ens name can be restored to my wallet address, right? It’s just that in the future it won’t be able to trade anymore.
2 Likes
Plus, I’m more than happy to set it up as some sort of anti-Ku Klux Klan information hub. I am also a person who loves peace and hates hate.
1 Like
This applies for only as long as the name doesn’t expire, correct?
Does this have any practical utility? I am curious if this adds or removes what functionalities on the ENS side – which you mentioned is what can be ‘corrected’, not the NFT itself.
Yes. You will never be able to sell it, it won’t appear on OpenSea and it won’t appear in your wallet as an NFT like other names do. Basically, anything to do with ‘ownership’ of the name/NFT is blocked until expiry. I don’t know if you gain any practical advantage from this since you still cannot trade and hence never sell.
It becomes a weird limbo in which I’m sure there will be tons of other types of weird scenarios. Because he has registered it in the reverse registrar it even shows up as his main address. It becomes sort of a like a perpetual lease, in which you are not the real owner but for most practical matters you act like one.
Yes. But anyone can renew it. I’m actually tempted to add a 10 year extension on that name, just because right now that weird scenario seems better than just having it go back to an auction where it can be taken by anyone with bad intent.
1 Like
This is very interesting.
ETH is dead judging by the gas so go ahead 
1 Like
I looked at it and it was transferable, so I was willing to transfer its controller to peace-loving, anti-KKK parties.
Are you so unoptimistic about eth? Where is the ens placed when eth dies?
Does this mean that I can trade it by transferring control? As long as you keep renewing, you can always use it. If that’s the case, do you have any suggestions?
I am joking! Don’t take it seriously please. I wouldn’t be spending my time here if I thought ETH was dying. I was pointing to a running joke on twitter which avsa might find funny
No. You cannot trade. Period.
Suggestions for? You can use it as a name as you are doing it now. That’s about it. You cannot make money off it by selling it
1 Like
I went back and thought about this. It seems like there is no way for holder to get the ownership back for the purpose of trading for instance; in that case perhaps they would rather take the risk of the name going back to the market. By renewing the name, you’ll be ruining holder’s chances. However, holder has already made the mistake of relinquishing the ownership (even if it was genuinely just a mistake), so they technically have no say in it. This is a weird tangle if you can call it one. Anyone can renew the name. It is at the mercy of the crowd at the moment.