On Mon, Nov 30, 1998 at 09:13:15AM -0800, Jack Killpatrick wrote:
> The "ethics" discussion usually revolves around the ideas that "the ads pay
> for the content on many sites and if you don't see the ads, you're stealing
> the content"
I don't see any ethical issue here. I'm simply choosing to configure
my browser (and other software) in the manner of my choice. Suppose
I choose to use a text-only browser (as I frequently do)?
> and "if the advertisers aren't supported, we won't be able to
> give you the content any more...because we have to get paid for what we do."
To quote someone of my acquaintance: This Is Not My Problem.
I find this discussion reminiscent of the debate over "begware", also known
as "shareware". My position is that you should either (a) charge or
(b) not charge, but that you should choose one or the other and stick to it.
But if you choose [ (c) begging ] then don't be surprised or disappointed
if people consider it optional. (Footnote: I do not use shareware, period.)
---Rsk
Rich Kulawiec
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
____________________________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Join The Web Consultants Association : Register on our web site Now
Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants
If you lose the instructions All subscription/unsubscribing can be done
directly from our website for all our lists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
