The Line I Will Not Cross

[RogueWriter]

I think it is kind of sorrowful that the .com .org .info .us , etc... for the domain name VirginiaTechMassacre has been registered, and that the .com is apparently a for profit site - at least that's the way it looks to me.

Somebody out there is a sick, sick person, IMO.


So, there are still bodies being pulled from buildings, and someone is trying to make money off of them.

The .org looks like a memorial site, at least.

 

[kubativity]

!

Kuba, Im going to disagree with you. There is something morally wrong with trying to directly profit from tragedy. Yes, I agree there are many business models that profit from misfortune (for example those check cashing / loan stores). They prey on people who are short on money, and charge rediculous rates. Is it right? Morally I dont think so but Legally its allowed. But I also see a difference between the check cashing place, and registering the domain of a tragedy like this. There are degrees of "wrong" and Im not sure exactly how to word it, but if there is a scale - registering a domain like this, would weight in heavily.

Justin

Justin,

I dont think there is anything morally wrong with offering a loan at a high rate to somebody. They agree to the terms and you are not forcing them into anything. But back to the discussion at hand. Is it morally wrong to register a name that relates to a tragedy? and my answer is still a big NO! I dont see any moral harm done by registering any name whatsoever. Do you think News papers should not report these things either? I mean they profit from their exploitment of sensationalism with stories such as these. News outlets LOVE when this sort of thing happens. Are they breaking any moral code? If so you might as well boycott your TV and turn off your internet and become amish!

Jakub.tv

 

[RogueWriter]

Kuba....

You keep swerving away from the point. Does virginia tech massacre dot ws offer any content? Anything of value? I'm fairly certain the untargetted ad of "University Massacre" for courseadvisor.com doesn't add a whole lot, and I am rather sure that CA can't be too happy about the ad, either. So, what is the reason for the domain's existence other than to profit from tragedy?

If you go to foxnews.com or abc.com or whatever, each of those domains actually hold an INORDINATE amount of content. They contribute to society, and yes, their contributions cost money, so they have to find a way to pay for their expenses.

You keep making the same argument that is not predicated on a legitimate point.

 

[goodkarmaco]

Thosands of domains are regged daily that have no purpose or have no content. The truth is they may in the future, thats why they are regged. The person who regs them has the responsibility to place content and if they choose not to for a few years, so be it.

Don't join the lynch mob, allow domainers to excercise free will in registrations of domains. Magazines full of trash are everywhere. Content is not important. Domains for possible future sales should have no attachments as to what has to be done with them.

I like how the example that newspapers have reports and they profit from it is not seen as a issue. That example is hands down the way to learn from this.

Don't join the lynch mob, allow domainers to excercise free will in registrations of domains. They are simply domains, buy them, sell them, love them hate them, whatever.

Buying and selling domains is not ruled by a moral majority group and personally I will be happy to see it kept that way.

 

[RogueWriter]

Well, it's also true that the newspapers and such existed before the tragedy occurred, giving us information about inclement weather coming our way, battlefield reports about how our soldiers are doing and whether or not our government is giving them the proper equipment and support, fun shows that provide mindless entertainment so we can veg out from the daily grind, comedy shows to make us laugh, dramas to excite us, mysteries to puzzle us, all of which exist for the purpose of providing us with content - for a price.

It is not possible to prevent people from buying sucky names, that is a part of freedom. Another part of freedom is our right to say, you know what, I think that was rather ignorant of such and such a person to try making a quick buck off a tragedy, even as people were dying.

What exactly is wrong with me expressing my freedom of speech and saying people like that are callous, greedy, self centered ambulance chasers? I make no apologies for feeling like I do, and I expect they will continue to live in a callous, greedy self centered world, oblivious to the pain they inflict on victims families, as is their right.

 

[NameCharger]

Greed hates competition.

I'm not really a fan of tragedy sites and if I ever got the notion to reg one, I would gear it towards relief efforts revolving that tragedy and state on the site that a specified percentage of revenue would be given to fund(s) regarding that tragedy and would carry through on it and make good on my word.

I'm sure the critics would ignore this kind of site.

 

[Spade]

I will revist the issue one more time... The comparison of a newspaper to a domain name is inherritantly flawed. A Newspaper is different because it uses its own paper/name to spread news.

The issue here is that when registering a tragedy name (for a profitable flip) costs the victims family and friends not only the ability to use the name for positive, but also potentially extra money that could be used to bennefit society as a whole if they do buy the domain.

Im simply saying I dont believe its right to profit directly from the victims family and friends...

 

[goodkarmaco]

Rogue writer,

I fully respect you have opinions and I agree with some of them. I just am not a big fan of publicily bashing fellow domainers who may not see the issue as you or I do.

Seems if some tragedy strikes we see this occurring over and over and it really is a bit heavy handed. Yes I think it can benefit the profession if domainers speak their minds. I think the tone of the comments are needing refinement in some cases though. Comments such as "I would not do it do not bother me at all". But comments such as "tar and feather them" or "scumbags" are ok to say at the bar with a friend, but to publicly call many in our profession such terms is not doing any of us any good at all. I realize at the moment we are upset about the event and the loss of not only many lives, but this new reality that things are just getting out of hand and society is spinning out of control. I just am commenting on the fact that we need to allow others freedom in running their domain business.

The reason is in a society many are doing things we do not go along with.

For instance many domain owners are into porn domains. If the same talk was to be applied to these names, then we would be seeing the folks who have a big problem with porn calling those who have adult domains "scumbags" etc.

They certainly can do so, but adult names will continue to be regged and those making a profit from them will continue to do so also. We cannot have one category such as tragedy domains banned, or put down, unless other categories get the same treatment too. That in my opinion is opening a big can of worms. Better to have the searches and the traffic define what people want.

Domainspade, many of us have the same opinion, that some names are better left to the families to reg, but if a domainer does reg it, that is certainly their choice.

To say we should not profit from any pain that involves tragedy is just too much of a control statement. We personaly may not, but we allow others to operate their domain business as they see fit to do so. If the argument was to be applied across the board, we would have moral cops in every type of activity, such as you cannot charge for coffins anymore than the actual cost to make the coffin. Or you may not make any profit from the flowers delivered to a funeral that was of a person who died form a tragedy event.

Of course the examples could go on in every profession and it really is many businesses that profit from tragedy. So like you say, your choice is a personal one. If it is a chioce, then we really should temper how we talk about a domain owner who does not act as we may. I appreceiate how you say that is your choice and I respect that.

 

[dhscott]

Bump this thread up again with a link to some more Immoral Domaining:

http://www.namepros.com/domain-name-discussion/342775-line-i-will-not-cross-more.html