do you think its moral to take domain names that just expired so the site has to find a whole other name
Actually ezcoms, it's OK to mix morality and business. This is why we have contracts, etc. Your answer should have been: there's nothing immoral about that, because the owner is the one who let his domain expire.Is it dumb to mix morality with business? We are actually in this business to make money...Legally....
Is it dumb to mix morality with business? We are actually in this business to make money...Legally....
do you think its moral to take domain names that just expired so the site has to find a whole other name
Lets legalize price fixing... Monopolies.. And relax child labor laws...
it meant nothing to me
I'm surprised about the serious replies. lol.
So is it moral to use taxpayers' money to bail out wall street companies who made a wrong bet and went bankrupt?
Is it moral to use fabricated evidence about weapons of mass destruction to justify the invasion of another country and bringing down its government?
A lot of bigger moral issues around. Makes "domaining" a much lesser evil. lol
Came from the mouth of Colin Powell, after he left the White House.How do you know there were no weapons of mass destruction? Just because CNN and the liberal media didn't see nukes sitting around doesn't mean there wasn't. Saddam talk or domain talk??
Of the three, only one is a pure-play related to 'morality'... and even that's debatable once you get outside the Anglosphere.
Came from the mouth of Colin Powell, after he left the White House.
"I was duped!", he said.
that's the whole point. doing the same with 'creditcards.com' - type domain would prove a lot more
That's an interesting term. I can almost picture out an End-User sweating marbles, as every negotiation hour that passes raises the price tag by $300. LOLspeculative terrorism.
:lol:That's an interesting term. I can almost picture out an End-User sweating marbles, as every negotiation hour that passes raises the price tag by $300. LOL
Price fixing can be done for positive or negative - I was talking specifically about prices that were fixed in crisis or relative to need. (For example, raising the price of medicine to beyond what one would consider reasonable remuneration when an illness was spreading).
Child labor laws are interesting because the morality is a matter of perspective. I'm talking here about using cheap child labor in an exploitative system. Morality is usually in the eye of the beholder - the west (myself included) look at it generally from an economic standpoint and not an overal general welfare standpoint which means that we can force changes from "bad" to "worse".
[snip]Not really - with the number of people who think doing that was stupid (there are many threads here). Some people think that the answer is "$500 to prove that they really want it" etc.
The act is as meaningful regardless of the underlying asset (though maybe harder to do for some). How hard it is doesn't change that much, imho.
Clearly Ray is a stand up guy... but some of us already knew that.
I am not following you here. Child labor laws and many other protection laws were not implemented from an economic standpoint (i.e. the economy will be better off if we eliminated exploitation of children) but that it was wrong to do so.
So going back to Domaining, exploitation would be taking advantage of someone's desperate situation for "exorbitant" financial gain--- wherein the price of the domain is not tied to its practical inherent value, but on how desperate the buyer is.