Re[2]: [ga] Critics say VeriSign still has...

["William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>]

Hello Kent,

Tuesday, April 10, 2001, 10:43:41 PM, Kent Crispin wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 06:21:24PM -0700, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
>> Perhaps because they generate revenue for the industry. What economic
>> incentives could you point to that are gained from the prevention of
>> speculation?
>> 
>> Why is speculation in real estate a long-practiced tradition and
>> considered "good business" while people are trying to cast domain
>> speculation as "bad?"

> Why is speculation in real estate good while speculation in human body
> parts bad? I don't know -- might have something to do with the commodity
> in question and how it's used, and what people think about it, don'cha
> think? Speculation in itself is neither good or bad, but if people 
> think that speculation in a particular commodity is bad, then it's bad.

Comparing trade in human body parts to domain names is a far stretch,
Kent, and a very bad one at that.

The ethical considerations are entirely different, and have absolutely
ZERO relation to each other.

One cannot sell body parts at all, Kent.  So there is nothing to
speculate in.

Did you really have to stretch this far to find an example that suits
your position?

-- 
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:william@userfriendly.com


--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html