- Impact
- 140
First off, I'm glad to be back to updating at least the articles and polls on Doma.in...hopefully some people have remembered the site!
Anyways, I just put up a poll on there that I think is important and intriguing. There have been very heated discussions about this here, with some pretty concrete opinions about where the line must be drawn. The threads I have seen have even had people arguing with each other on how despicable an individual was who was selling domains related to the VA Tech shooting on eBay, with the auction having no apparent mention of any donation of proceeds to charity. I would like this thread and poll to spark discussion and hopefully give people some perspectives they may not have considered before, but please do whatever you can to stay focused on the issue at hand and not get into any personal attacks.
========================================================
Poll Question: Where is the line of acceptable domaining practices drawn following a tragic event like the Virginia Tech shooting?
A: It's okay to register related domains, but ONLY to put up a non-profit charitable site with direct unpaid links to charities.
B: It's okay to register related domains, but ONLY to put up a non-profit charitable site OR to sell ONLY if 100% of the proceeds go to charity.
C: It's okay to register related domains to make a profit ONLY if charities are helped in the process (such as parking w/ links to charities) OR to sell ONLY if 100% of the proceeds go to charity.
D: It's okay to register related domains to make a profit ONLY if charities are helped in the process (such as parking w/ links to charities) OR to sell ONLY if a majority of the proceeds go to charity.
E: It's okay to register related domain names and put ANYTHING on them within legality or sell them for up to 100% profit - free speech.
F: It's NOT okay to register any related domain names, out of respect to the victims and their loved ones.
========================================================
I will say that I personally used to follow D, but now mostly follow A. I DO admit to still having a couple of the tsunami domains that I keep parked with links to charities on them (C as I would not sell them for less than 100% to charity), but at this point, I would no longer register domains related to a tragic event unless I intended to put a fully charitable website on it (A).
I'm likely in the minority on this, but I think this is a rare case where the selling of a domain name should be seen in a different light than the developing, which is why I made the choices what they are. I believe that the action of buying the domains with the intent to sell them, whether for 100% charity or not, in and of itself could be seen as showing disrespect to the victims of the tragedy. I want to get other people's thoughts on this as well.
So overall, I would draw the line of morality at C now (and would even be reluctant to say it's okay to sell the domain, even for 100% charity). Yes, that's even though I used to be of D mentality. I now personally practice A for current and future registrations, C with names I already have registered. I DO however understand the mentality behind D and F. As much as I think E is a morally reprehensible stance to take, the slippery slope of freedom of speech comes into play, so at least US laws and probably most countries' laws would have a stance of E, and I think that is the correct way for law to handle it.
Anyways, I just put up a poll on there that I think is important and intriguing. There have been very heated discussions about this here, with some pretty concrete opinions about where the line must be drawn. The threads I have seen have even had people arguing with each other on how despicable an individual was who was selling domains related to the VA Tech shooting on eBay, with the auction having no apparent mention of any donation of proceeds to charity. I would like this thread and poll to spark discussion and hopefully give people some perspectives they may not have considered before, but please do whatever you can to stay focused on the issue at hand and not get into any personal attacks.
========================================================
Poll Question: Where is the line of acceptable domaining practices drawn following a tragic event like the Virginia Tech shooting?
A: It's okay to register related domains, but ONLY to put up a non-profit charitable site with direct unpaid links to charities.
B: It's okay to register related domains, but ONLY to put up a non-profit charitable site OR to sell ONLY if 100% of the proceeds go to charity.
C: It's okay to register related domains to make a profit ONLY if charities are helped in the process (such as parking w/ links to charities) OR to sell ONLY if 100% of the proceeds go to charity.
D: It's okay to register related domains to make a profit ONLY if charities are helped in the process (such as parking w/ links to charities) OR to sell ONLY if a majority of the proceeds go to charity.
E: It's okay to register related domain names and put ANYTHING on them within legality or sell them for up to 100% profit - free speech.
F: It's NOT okay to register any related domain names, out of respect to the victims and their loved ones.
========================================================
I will say that I personally used to follow D, but now mostly follow A. I DO admit to still having a couple of the tsunami domains that I keep parked with links to charities on them (C as I would not sell them for less than 100% to charity), but at this point, I would no longer register domains related to a tragic event unless I intended to put a fully charitable website on it (A).
I'm likely in the minority on this, but I think this is a rare case where the selling of a domain name should be seen in a different light than the developing, which is why I made the choices what they are. I believe that the action of buying the domains with the intent to sell them, whether for 100% charity or not, in and of itself could be seen as showing disrespect to the victims of the tragedy. I want to get other people's thoughts on this as well.
So overall, I would draw the line of morality at C now (and would even be reluctant to say it's okay to sell the domain, even for 100% charity). Yes, that's even though I used to be of D mentality. I now personally practice A for current and future registrations, C with names I already have registered. I DO however understand the mentality behind D and F. As much as I think E is a morally reprehensible stance to take, the slippery slope of freedom of speech comes into play, so at least US laws and probably most countries' laws would have a stance of E, and I think that is the correct way for law to handle it.
Last edited:
