[116956] in Cypherpunks
Re:
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Reese)
Tue Aug 24 10:59:49 1999
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990823231605.03b22790@flex.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 23:16:05 -1000
To: Petro <petro@suba.com>, cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
From: Reese <reeza@flex.com>
In-Reply-To: <v04205500b3e7d5375af6@[216.112.5.39]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Reply-To: Reese <reeza@flex.com>
At 09:51 PM 23-08-99 -0700, Petro wrote:
>
>>I chose "moral decrepitude" because I knew it would be a hot potato, it
>>could just as easily have been "persons with dirty fingernails", "persons
>>who need a bath" or "persons who use profanity in public".
>>
>>Don't read so much into it, it was just an example.
>
> Don't duck the question monkey boy.
>
> If you have a POLICY that says "I serve anyone whose wearing
>a shirt", and then you refuse service to me because at that point in
>time, you are serving a little old lady whose offended by the fact
>that it's not a collared shirt I'm wearing to the table, then YOU are
>violating your stated policy, and deserve to get called on the carpet
>for it.
Bad example. Suppose we have businesses side-by-side on "A" Street. We
share a marquis out on the sidewalk. One day, we decide you can put your
advertisements on my side of the marquis, I can put my advertisements on
your side. We make this agreement, with the understanding that either of us
can back out of it, at any time, for any reason.
One day, one of us decides to back out of it, and wants earlier arrangement
reinstated.
Where's the beef?
> Amazon is demonstrating that they have NO commitment to the
>open discourse of ideas, that they have no commitment to anything but
>their pocket book.
Amazon is not a bulletin board, where whoever can stump for their rendition
of morality and the pursuit of happiness. They are a business, providing a
service and a product. Unless they watch the bottom line & keep it in the
black, they risk insolvency.
> I prefer to deal with organizations--when and where I
>can--that do display this commitment.
I prefer that organizations I deal with maintain a degree of honesty,
stability and predictability. I think it is safe to assume that by
watching that bottom line, Amazon will still be a viable business entity
for many years to come, consequently I can trust they will be there to fill
my hard media requirements.
If I have disputes with management over issues unrelated to media resale -
say along the lines of K-mart/Rosie O'Donnell - then I can go to the Barnes
& Noble website, or to the local Waldenbooks. But I think you will
acknowledge that the K-mart/Rosie issue is of a different order of
precedence than the nebulous title of "Amazon.com Associate" - why do you
protest Amazon's policy of investigating who they grant this dubious
distinction to???
Reese
If you want to run cool, you've got to run on any heavy fuel,,,
