4 ms·
I completely understand your point, but I'd like to see things change rather than just abiding by this ridiculously bad practice. As you say, the rep obviously
by timrogers 14y ago
I completely understand your point, but I'd like to see things change rather than just abiding by this ridiculously bad practice. As you say, the rep obviously has full access without this so the whole act is pointless.
Even if not for me alone, I'd like to see this resolve as it's just bad form. A company culture that allows this cannot be good for the security of all domains held with 1and1.
I may well move away anyway, as you say, as I'm just so disappointed, but I'd like to see change anyway.
- r00fus 14y agoYou change the policies by applying economic pressure and moving your accounts to other providers. Seriously it's not worth your time to change other people's behavior. Better to give them incentives or (as in this case) take them away to sway their actions.
- timrogers 14y agoI will do - my only concern is that my economic pressure alone won't be enough. This post seeks to address information failure, if you will.
- brador 14y agoDisagree. Calling them out like this can massively multiply the economic pressure applicable. It's likely I and many other readers of this article will now never use 1and1 if it's possible to avoid them. A sort of passive boycott if you will.
- timrogers 14y agoIndeed - the economic pressure of my ~10 domains alone is not enough. The economic pressure of some portion of HN users is more significant.