[DNS] Secondary Market

[DNS] Secondary Market

From: Darryl <dassa§dhs.org>
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2006 22:31:17 +1000
|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: dns-bounces+dassa=dhs.org&#167;dotau.org 
|> [mailto:dns-bounces+dassa=dhs.org&#167;dotau.org] On Behalf Of 
|> Charlie McCormack
|> Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 9:35 PM
|> To: '.au DNS Discussion List'
|> Subject: Re: [DNS] Secondary Market
|> 
|> > Nothing wrong with making a profit, but exploiting markets 
|> and doing 
|> > the wrong thing isn't the best way to do so.
|> 
|> Exploiting markets is what it's all about I'm afraid, there 
|> is no other way, no matter how you justify it, or what way 
|> you like to look at it, you're still exploiting a market 
|> when you try to sell to it, or buy from it, yeah sure we add 
|> fancy words like service and product, but we still are exploiting.
|> 
|> I'm certain that all parties involved in a sale are only 
|> interested in themselves, and the best deal they can get, 
|> again exploiting the situation, oh right, that's wrong and unethical.

No, there are some people and I hope in the majority, who try to make it a
win/win situation where exploitation and unethical business practices don't
enter into the equation.
 
|> Wrong? Who say's it is wrong? I'll do whatever it takes to 
|> keep food on the table, whether that be killing a cow (oh 
|> poor cow) or exploiting a market before someone else does, 
|> the same way other companies such as Microsoft, Oracle, etc, 
|> etc did before others did.

I would take that to mean you would kill another person and feed them up as
well if a cow isn't available.  That sort of thinking is what makes having
rules and regulations necessary.  Some people need protecting from themselves.

|> > You sound as if you are proud you are breaking the rules 
|> or the spirit 
|> > of the rules.  It is people such as yourself that make 
|> restrictions 
|> > necessary.
|> 
|> Yes I am proud. It's allowed me to retire at a young age 
|> 30-40. And no I'm not breaking any rules, there are no rules 
|> against this type of trade, or sale, and never will be, 
|> because it goes against our 'real world' laws.

I haven't retired and never intend to.  But then I am not out to make what I
can and care about others.  I also follow the rules, both those written and
those implied.  Your view of what 'real world" rules there are is flawed.  If
I took your lead I'd be justified in taking all your money and doing whatever
I wanted.  All the phishing and scams are legitimate under your logic as it is
just taking advantage.  If I can get your banking details out of you by
whatever means it allows me to clean your account out.

|> > If
|> > everyone could be counted on to do the right thing there 
|> wouldn't be a 
|> > problem.
|> 
|> Really, that is a really naive thing to say, I'm sure you 
8|> meant to write that differently.

No, it isn't na?ve, I know people can't be relied on to do the right thing.
There are far too many people who think like you do.  Which is why we have
laws, rules and behaviour modifiers.

|> > Or is that lawyers with a williness to represent any 
|> business without 
|> > delving into the ethics involved?
|> 
|> LOL, thanks that was funny.

Glad you got a chuckle out of it.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch 
Received on Sat Jul 15 2006 - 12:31:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Oct 20 2014 - 20:00:16 UTC