4 ms·
> In changing its position, Go Daddy remains steadfast in its promise to support security and stability of the Internet. In an effort to eliminate any confusion
by drx 15y ago
> In changing its position, Go Daddy remains steadfast in its promise to support security and stability of the Internet. In an effort to eliminate any confusion about its reversal on SOPA though, Jones has removed blog postings that had outlined areas of the bill Go Daddy did support.
> "Go Daddy has always fought to preserve the intellectual property rights of third parties, and will continue to do so in the future," Jones said.
Translation: we got caught this time, but will not hesitate to do it again.
- RexRollman 15y agoThey are simply NOT trustworthy.
- geekam 15y agoFool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...you can't get fooled again, once you're fooled. ~George W. Bush. The man said it himself. They are not trustworthy.
- RobPfeifer 15y agoI've met the CEO a couple of times, and I'd say he basically brags about exploitative they are. Have to say I'm shocked at how many tech savvy people use them. Didn't realize how convincing Danica Patrick is I guess.
- brudgers 15y agoI don't know how tech saavy I am, but I continue to use them because they provide low cost Windows based hosting which is relatively easy to use. Every time I look for an alternative, a comparable level of services is significantly more expensive at other providers. I wish it weren't the case, but it is.
- BrandonM 15y agoThis is the first rational explanation I've seen for this, so I voted it up. I'd be interested in hearing alternative solutions, if only for your sake :).
- vacri 15y agoI don't play around with domain control much, so don't keep myself informed, but if I were to register domains, it doesn't matter how cheap (or free!) GoDaddy was, just having seen their Superbowl ads, they're clearly not a company that intends to be taken seriously. You can get away with that with beer ads because beer is basically entertainment. But domains are part of business, a core block. You need that to be reliable and serious. Doesn't mean your ads need to be po-faced, but it does mean that you have to exhibit some nod towards indicating you're a professional company. Nice tits are nice tits, but that doesn't make me confident in the technical nous - or perhaps more importantly, intended direction - of an internet company.
- marshray 15y agoThey will think at least twice about it before lending their name to such a thing publicly.
- spooneybarger 15y agoYes, they can just continue to lend their name to shooting elephants and misogynist ads. I seriously doubt this is going to have much of an impact on them. So this one particular instance came back to bite them, good to know for them that pissing off techies is bad for business but animal rights people, devout christians and women ( all of whom have complained about various other parts of their business in the past ) don't have any impact on the companies actions.
- slig 15y agoWhile I agree that their ads sucks, I don't think they're misogynist. Like every ad, they're targeted to a specific audience.
- dreww 15y agoyes, they're targeted to an audience. an audience who responds to sexually objectified images of women. also known as misogynists. hello?
- DilipJ 15y agomost of their ads show some woman exhibiting reluctance to undressing, and then the men around her coercing her to do so anyways. of course they're misogynist. But of course, you have to understand that it's part of the company's philosophy. This is the same CEO that came out in favor of waterboarding: http://www.metafilter.com/42906/Dear-Bob-Im-glad-youre-not-in-charge http://www.metafilter.com/42906/Dear-Bob-Im-glad-youre-not-i... the same CEO that goes elephant hunting: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/31/bob-parsons-godaddy-ceo-elephant-hunt_n_843121.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/31/bob-parsons-godaddy... supporting SOPA fits in line with that philosophy. The one thing waterboarding, elephant hunting, SOPA and their misogynistic ads have in common is the element of using force against those who are far weaker than you are.
- fedxc 15y agoAgree. They changed their mind because they were threaten. It's not an honest communication, they are just trying to avoid losing money/business.
- sounds 15y agoThis is hilarious! More translations that might make your day: > In an effort to eliminate any confusion about its reversal on SOPA though, Jones has removed blog postings that had outlined areas of the bill Go Daddy did support. Translation: we said some pretty stupid things yesterday. > Go Daddy ... worked with federal lawmakers for months ... legislation first introduced some three years ago ... entire Internet community ... ensure the integrity of the Internet Translation: we've been neck-deep in this legislation, and will be pushing the next version of this bill too. Seized domains would have been a de facto transfer to Go Daddy.
- Steko 15y agoGo Daddy wants SOPA to pass so bad sometimes they just cold shut down websites whenever big content sends them an email: http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/content/michael-bentkover-warner-bros-shuts-down-cosmic-book-news-over-dark-knight-rises http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/content/michael-bentkover-w...
- draggnar 15y agoHere's another from last night: > Go Daddy has received some emails that appear to stem from the boycott prompt, but we have not seen any impact to our business. We understand there are many differing opinions on the SOPA regulations Translation: Screw you guys, wait, what did you say Jimmy Wales? http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/12/godaddy-faces-december-29-boycott-over-sopa-support.ars http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/12/godaddy-face... http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/12/godaddy-faces-december-29-boycott-over-sopa-support.ars http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/12/godaddy-face...
- mavrc 15y ago> In an effort to eliminate any confusion about its reversal on SOPA though, Jones has removed blog postings that had outlined areas of the bill Go Daddy did support. Somebody read 1984 and rooted for Big Brother.
- nitrogen 15y agoYou'd be surprised how willing most people are to just rewrite or delete history as it suits them. I've heard of guys whose ex-girlfriends tore out and destroyed pages of their diaries related to the guy when they broke up. People delete their half of conversations on forums, Facebook, etc. when they get proven wrong, so it looks like the other party was just talking to themselves. Someone once asked me to help them remove someone from a photo (not a family photo, a documentary photo of a community activity). "Why?" "Because he was being annoying!" "But this photo could be printed in the paper. He was there. You can't just rewrite history like that!" "It's my photo! If you won't help me, I'll get someone else to do it." Rewriting history is the norm. Most people haven't read 1984, and I suspect that many that do, don't get it.