Here is the way my history transitioned. The initial roll out with me as a target started June 2016 and with all of the spam coming from ENOM registered domains. I kept sending abuse@enom daily reports all went ignored. No response whatsoever. So I wrote to the BBB and reported them as being a spam haven partner and after about a week, to my surprise ENOM responded back through the BBB and with that stated they had killed all of the domains I had reported as well as sent me a list of the twelve or so they had deleted. Still this meant little, since the spammer relies on the domain to be productive primarily on the day the spam email is delivered. Well further complaints to ENOM seemed to fall on deaf ears and the spammer moved to using the.co registrar while attempting to depend on the language barrier to stop reports to the .co organization of the bogus WhoIS contact data (I took care care of reporting to them because I am bi-lingual).

Now today the only process that seems to work against ENOM/ NameCheap spam partnership is to report to the registar’s regulating authority the bogus name, address and phone for the domains that are being logged into WhoIS. This still takes up to a week to process, so the spammer and their ENOM / NameCheap spam partner still is virtually unaffected.

Today the spammers have shifted back to NameCHeap almost exclusively and the spammer seems to no longer care that invalid whois data reports are being sumitted to ICANN and the Columbian .co authority, since the evil deed they are doing is completed long before any authority can get to the queue to take down the domain.

NameCheap differs primarily from ENOM in that while ENOM pretends to “take spam seriously” they will do nothing regarding your reports for several days, assuming they do anything at all, and then they make a whoopla about taking action long after it is too late to stop the payload of “first responders” to the spam emails. NameCheap differs in that their abuse@namecheap will blatantly tell you they don’t get involved in customer’s spamming activity and suggest you take it up with some legal authority, saying their hands are tied.

Speaking of legal authority, does anyone know of any lawyer that would take on a class action lawsuit and file it against NameCheap and ENOM? It seems that the loss of more money than their $10 - $40 daily spammer windfall may be the only language that these two can understand.

That is exactly what lead me to this page. I grew up in Anchorage/Eagle River/ and Girdwood for 5 years total and have been back many times.

I can’t tell exactly, but I’m almost positive this image was taken on the backside of the 6 mile tunnel from Portage to Whittier, right after you get out of the tunnel these exact mountains are there along with the beautiful blue glacial ice chunks. Very beautiful place, good catch!

UNVA was initially accredited by ACICS.

In 2007-2008 there was a “management coup” in which the management took control of the university from the owner. The management group created a competing university and did a great deal of damage to UNVA. We believe (they actually told one of our team) that the intent was to destroy UNVA and move the students, staff and faculty to the new school.

During this time there were issues with ACICS. The management team reached an agreement with ACICS in which accreditation would be withdrawn in August, 2008 and that UNVA would never again apply for ACICS accreditation. The August date meant that they would keep accreditation while they were in control but that it would be lost when the actual owner was back in control.

When the owner returned, the university was in chaos. More than 50 boxes of files had been shredded. Student and faculty records and financial records were in disarray or nonexistent. Money had been drained from the accounts. The student population was down, and very few new students had joined, meaning that the current students were about to graduate. There was no functional electronic student records system, and the electronic data we had was incomplete, inaccurate, and located in multiple unconnected files. In short, the university was in no condition to apply for accreditation.

For the next 18 months, we focused our efforts on recovery. We corrected all of the above problems. Our student population grew. We added additional locations with upgraded systems. We finally felt that we had made enough progress to begin a new accreditation process. We elected to apply to SACS, considered by many to be one of the most difficult accreditations to obtain. We assigned staff and also hired consultants for the project.

The application took more than a year to write. That is because during the process we found areas in our university which we needed to improve in order to make the application stronger. We finally completed the application and submitted it to SACS. They accepted the application and began their review process.

During this time, I was trying to keep everyone informed through articles in our newsletter. SACS notified me that I was breaking an accreditation rule by doing so and told me to stop. I wrote an article in the next newsletter saying that because of the rule I could provide much less information in the future.

SACS returned the application with the recommendation that we withdraw. They gave several reasons. The most difficult to correct was the lack of an acceptable Institutional Effectiveness Plan. This is a process where we show that we collect data about the effectiveness of our university (graduation rates, learning outcomes, whether students get jobs after graduation, etc.). We also have to have ways to identify problems and to correct them and to show an ongoing history (with proper documentation) of following the plan.

We agreed to withdraw the application, which is the reason that I am now able to write this article. We can resubmit after we have addressed the areas in which they have concerns.

We also spoke to ACICS regarding their willingness to accept a new application from UNVA, given the extensive changes and improvements in our school in the past 3 years. They made no promises but they were at least willing to speak with us. While we were in those discussions, we got the ICE raid. Since then we have had no further discussions with ACICS.

While accreditation is very important to UNVA, our immediate focus is on responding to the SEVP letter. We will re-focus on accreditation as soon as the immediate crisis is resolved.

David Lee”

It seems that there are forces that try to suppress this letter. That’s why I am re-posting it here, to preserve it for eternity…