Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet

Imgur.com: Why We Dumped GoDaddy 279

Posted by samzenpus
from the it's-not-me-it's-you dept.
Velcroman1 writes "On the eve of what has been dubbed "Dump Go Daddy Day," imgur.com — the massive image hosting site responsible for an astonishing 28 terabytes of bandwidth and nearly 200 million page views per day — has already changed its registry entries, foreshadowing the potential negative effect of a boycott set to begin Thursday morning. GoDaddy.com originally supported the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) but quickly recanted its position when the call for a boycott circulated. 'The outcry kind of forced our hand,' imgur founder and owner Alan Schaaf said. 'I'm against the SOPA act and imgur as a company is against it. We just feel it is terrible that GoDaddy.com would support this legislation.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Imgur.com: Why We Dumped GoDaddy

Comments Filter:
  • by Black Parrot (19622) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @06:11AM (#38524118)

    GoDaddy.com originally supported the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) but quickly recanted its position when the call of a boycott circulated.

    Nothing like money-at-stake to reveal whether someone has a spine.

    • Re:Yea, well... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Arancaytar (966377) <arancaytar.ilyaran@gmail.com> on Thursday December 29, 2011 @06:18AM (#38524146) Homepage

      Better spinelessly stop supporting evil than courageously continuing to support it, though. Boycott worked exactly as intended, that's great news.

      • Re:Yea, well... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Spad (470073) <slashdot@NOsPam.spad.co.uk> on Thursday December 29, 2011 @07:21AM (#38524384) Homepage

        This is the problem with assigning anthropomorphic characteristics to companies; in the context of people, I would rather that someone have the strength of conviction to make and stick with the choice that they believe is right, rather than flip back and forth to fit the prevailing opinion (subject to the original decision having been made with all the facts).

        With companies though, it's really not possible for them to ignore things like this because of the likely impact on their business, so while GoDaddy are just shamelessly pretending to drop support for SOPA to vainly try and appease The Internet, they don't really have a choice. Of course, they could have made the right choice in the first place, but they're dicks, so that wasn't going to happen.

        Either way, their initial support for SOPA and helping to write it to get themselves immunity from its provisions mean that regardless of their recent actions, there's no way I'd ever give them my business now.

        • Re:Yea, well... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Decameron81 (628548) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @08:31AM (#38524626)

          ...I would rather that someone have the strength of conviction to make and stick with the choice that they believe is right, rather than flip back and forth to fit the prevailing opinion...

          In this particular case, I do agree that GoDaddy has no merit in their change of mind - because they are acting consistently bad with their customers, and don't really seem to have changed their mind at all.

          But it seems to me as if in our society we preferred that people stick to their decisions, rather than change their mind if there's overwhelming evidence that they've been wrong. Does it make sense?

          Recognizing mistakes and dealing properly with them is IMHO a very rare and positive trait, which should always be encouraged. Think of how much better things would be if this was more widely encouraged.

          • Re:Yea, well... (Score:4, Insightful)

            by jellomizer (103300) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @09:31AM (#38524864)
            People make mistakes (a company is a collection of people). For some odd reason our culture has become one that wants blood for every mistake. We hear about a security breach or data loss at Google or Amazon and we go "Well someone is going to get fired!" Why should someone get fired for making a mistake that anyone might have done. Was the person who pushed the button the did the work take all the blame, or should the whole organization be at blame because it was too easy to do that with a push of a button. I remembered early in my career I was cleaning out some temp files that emacs makes "ends with ~", I had a bunch of them so i did an rm -f * ~ vs an rm -f *~ So I ended up clearing out my project then continued onto my home directory. I felt bad I lost all my work, I didn't get fired my Boss asked about backup, I only had some a week ago. so had to work harder to get caught up, and in a few days I was back. But now I became very careful when using the rm -f command. People make mistakes and learn from them. If we need to punish people extra for mistakes people will not learn from them they will just be hostile to the organization that makes it easy to make mistakes and then severely punished for doing such.

            GoDaddy wants a reputation as a reputable DNS register. They probably supported SOPA so their name will not be targets as a friend to people/organization who perform software piracy. Then people started protesting it and pointing out how the rules are too strict and can hurt the good guy, so they changed their position.

            Software Piracy is a bad thing. If you believe that software should be free then go out and support GNU and other Free software projects. But pirating closed software and state you are morally right to do so, would also mean the people could violate the GPL and other Open Source Licenses using the same moral standards. However we are having a hard time coming up with a legal/technical solution to the problem with software Piracy that doesn't dramatically hurt the honest customers as well.

            So if they Didn't Approve SOPA they could have been seen as a harbor for software pirates (That gives them a bad name, and making new customers worry about choosing them).
            If they Approved SOPA they would would be branded to be against the small internet company who wants to make the next new thing (Pissing off their key customers)
            If they took no position then they would be considered apathetic to the goings on in the internet world. (That would mean that if a regulation passed they may not be in compliance and thus go out of business, so customers will avoid them)
            Or they swap position depending what they feel is public opinion (Then you get what happens now)
            • Re:Yea, well... (Score:5, Informative)

              by shentino (1139071) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @10:13AM (#38525290)

              They didn't change their position.

            • Software piracy? What are you on about? That is certainly not what is inspiring SOPA (though I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft were involved). By supporting SOPA DoDaddy came out as a collaborationist in the destruction of the open internet. Some things you can't just take back.
            • >Why should someone get fired for making a mistake that anyone might have done.
              You are right, we should never impeach anyone for doing something bad, let alone even criminal, and then playing dumb, like "oops, did i do that"

              Accountability is what is missing the most in the higher ups management position, I would take all the big bank CEOs that got us in the economic mess we still live today, while they got big bonues, line them up, and shoot them all, then let's see any more big shot think he can walk aw

              • Accountability. Is making sure the person who did push the button is actively involved to fix the problem. Accountability is also making sure the organization doesn't make the same mistake again.
                When people are afraid to make mistakes they are also afraid to exceed.

                Now if this employee has a history of making mistakes and being reckless then yes he should get canned. But for most people there are there to do a good job and if they mess up they are feeling really bad about it.

                If you have 12 million dollars
          • by smpoole7 (1467717)

            Right. I'm no fan of GoDaddy, and I think SOPA is one of the worst pieces of legislation to come along in a while. But here's the problem: if someone is doing "wrong," and then changes their mind -- even if that change of mind is obviously grudging and insincere -- how are we supposed to respond?

            As an analogy, a million years ago when I working in customer service (consumer electronics), my manager told me something I've never forgotten. The customer who calls to complain, and who says, "I've always used yo

            • I definitely understand what you are saying, however I have two points:

              1. What seems like continued action against them is really just 1 action against them. This is just how long it takes and what it looks like. They are going to lose customers and have their reputation trashed over this bad decision, it just doesn't happen all in one day. The boycott and moving of domains is just one event, it just happens to take a few months for it to play out.

              2. This sets a precedent and acts as an example to other com

            • Re:Yea, well... (Score:5, Informative)

              by Alsee (515537) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @12:02PM (#38526624) Homepage

              continuing to punish them after they've backed off of an unpopular decision

              Did you even read their press release? They have not backed off on SOPA. The press release starts out stating that they consider the issue of the "utmost importance" and that they intend to continue "working to help" on the language of SOPA in some unspecified manner, and then astoundingly proceeds to declare "It's very important that all Internet stakeholders work together on [SOPA]". GoDaddy actually has the psychotic GALL to tell us how important it is that WE support this turd.

              GoDaddy absolutely did not get the message here. The only message they got is that they are losing $$$.

              GoDaddy has only temporarily withdrawn their public endorsement of the law. The press release states they feel SOPA is "worth the wait" and "Go Daddy will support it when and if the Internet community supports it". GoDaddy still fully desires and intends to support SOPA in the future. GoDaddy expects US to get a clue and reverse our position to support it as soon as possible.

              They haven't changed their position in the slightest. All they have backed away from is the shitstorm over their pro-SOPA press release. They are merely trying to use the new press release as an umbrella to hide under while they continue "working to help" on SOPA.

              -

              • by TubeSteak (669689)

                , and then astoundingly proceeds to declare "It's very important that all Internet stakeholders work together on [SOPA]".

                What a laugh.
                Congress rarely invites consumer protection groups to the table when they're thinking of fucking the public with a law written by lobbyists.
                And Congress never invites [strike]citizens[/strike] consumers (we're "internet stakeholders" too!) into the conversation.

                The last straw is that when shitty laws like this one are proposed, they never die, even in the face of massive public backlash.
                The law just goes into submarine mode and waits for another opportunity to pop up and be voted on.

            • Re:Yea, well... (Score:4, Insightful)

              by Alsee (515537) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @12:46PM (#38527314) Homepage

              if someone is doing "wrong," and then changes their mind

              GoDaddy didn't change their mind in the slightest.

              if that change of mind is obviously [] insincere -- how are we supposed to respond?

              The fact that they supported SOPA in the first place was bad, but forgivable.

              Getting kicked in the nuts for it and still failing to Get A Clue, is even worse. It's generally rather unwise to forgive someone who is too stupid and stubborn to learn from their mistakes. But at least there would be some shred of respectability that they thought they were doing the right thing and being honest that they still think so.

              However their obviously insincere response is unforgivable. They issued a threadbare and dishonest press release that they were withdrawing support in the hope that we would be gullible enough to be fooled by it while they continue "working to help" on SOPA. They feel SOPA is "worth the wait" and they intend "Go Daddy will support it" in the future.

              Seriously, how do you respond when someone makes an insincere apology to pacify you, and they do it with the full intention to continue the behavior? Do you stand there saying "Thankyou for your apology, please continue kicking me in the nuts from behind my back."?

              -

        • I think I know where GoDaddy would stand with regards to a hypothetical extraterrestrial invasion. They'd be first in line to make a deal for themselves, while selling out the rest of Humanity.
      • Re:Yea, well... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by rtfa-troll (1340807) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @07:22AM (#38524392)

        Boycott worked exactly as intended....

        It's astounding how long a meme can keep going. Go Daddy has not changed it's view; it has not changed it's actions; it has just removed a couple of press releases about those actions and started to support SOPA behind the scenes. If Go Daddy had changed their viewpoint, and actually was opposed to SOPA now, then we should stop the boycott and concentrate on others who are worse. However, this is not a decision we need to make. Even as I post today Go Daddy's "general counsel and corporate secretary" has a blog posting up which clearly states her opinion in support of SOPA and is undersigned in her official role.

        If Christine is acting against company policy then Go Daddy needs to be disciplining her now. Lets be clear; not because of what she believes, but because she has a representative role for the company, is directly opposing and contradicting company policy and is doing so using the name of Go Daddy to get publicity for that role. Also because she was involved in drafting SOPA and should take responsibility for the mess that it is which is a clear and visible failure to work in Go Daddy's customers interests.

        If Go Daddy is still employing her without disciplinary action, and that blog posting is still up [rudysyndrome.com] then Go Daddy is effectively supporting SOPA and should continue to be boycotted.

        • by Snaller (147050)

          Few people believe that "Go Daddy" does anything but support this, regardless of what they say - forever after - because they are run by Old Industry - who hasn't thought clearly for decades - and who never thinks about whats best for the planet, only what they think its good for their wallet.

          • by jhigh (657789)
            This is the real point: if anyone actually believed that GoDaddy did a complete 180 over the course of about 24 hours, then all could be forgiven and forgotten. I don't know anyone that is buying that BS, though.
          • by ArsonSmith (13997)

            It's like walking in on your best friend banging your wife, he looks up and says, "sorry, dude. I'm almost finished." then continues until done.

            • by Black Parrot (19622) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @12:31PM (#38527070)

              It's like walking in on your best friend banging your wife, he looks up and says, "sorry, dude. I'm almost finished." then continues until done.

              In an old shaggy-dog joke, King Arthur goes on a long rant at the queen for her lack of fidelity, and then says:

              "And as for you, Sir Lancelot, the least you could do is stop while I'm talking."

        • Wow, what a hackneyed piece of garbage that blog post is. Just the first paragraph is loaded:

          aimed at protecting the intellectual property of hard-working Americans, U.S. business and the American public from the harm that necessarily flows from the purchase of counterfeit products.

          Crammed into this phrase, we have that vague and presumptuous term "intellectual property", the implication that it is in danger with those words "protecting" and "harm", and that it is something virtuous and precious and essential to our national character with such bits as "hard-working Americans" and "American public". And finally, because "intellectual property" isn't broad enough already, she mentions "counte

    • But they DIDN’T! (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 29, 2011 @07:06AM (#38524326)

      They *said* they changed their position.
      They *didn't* *actually* change it. And they won’t change it.
      There's a difference.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      When the court seized domains last year, it was Go Daddy that became the new registrar and hosted the "This domain has been seized..." page for ICE. They are opportunists who have been caught with their pants down on the wrong side of an issue whose importance to their client base they did not foresee.

      But then, if they had any sense of ethics in the first place, they would have known what they were doing was wrong.

    • by drinkypoo (153816)

      GoDaddy.com originally supported the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) but quickly recanted its position when the call of a boycott circulated.

      Nothing like money-at-stake to reveal whether someone has a spine.

      It has been revealed that GoDaddy has NOT withdrawn its official congressional support for SOPA [reddit.com].

    • by Chewbacon (797801)
      I feel offended, and so should every other Godaddy customer, they didn't think we'd see through the bullshit recant. So they're history. Just transferred all the domains I own or manage. Godaddy really punched themselves in the dick on this one.
  • by Fluffeh (1273756) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @06:15AM (#38524138)

    Que seneveratis metes.

    Or some such thing. My schools motto was that. What you sow, So shall you reap. One of those wonderful things that I recall as a kid I didn't think too much of. These days, can't be closer to home. GoDaddy, you fucked up. You got caught with your fingers in the cookie jar. All the advertisements on Australian TV won't help you enough. You have angered the internet. To you, we are anonymous. But we are not. We have domain names. We have money that you need. We have integrity. We have choices. You chose SOPA.

    We choose someone else.

    • by mgblst (80109) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @07:03AM (#38524314) Homepage

      You're so right. This one web address moving, imgur.com, is going to cost Godaddy millions, if not billions or karma. Or about $10.

      This will change nothing, Godaddy have already started lying about changing it's stance, when it has not.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Do you not understand how publicity works? As this dump GoDaddy meme gets more and more visibility, more and more people make the choice of participating. The number of domains imgur uses is totally irrelevant.

        This is one of the few case where a boycott actually works:
        * monetary cost to protester is negligible
        * amount of work needed is very small (neet to renew anyway)
        * GoDaddy isn't that good anyway so moving usually has no negative side effects
        At the moment GoDaddy really hopes thi

  • by hcs_$reboot (1536101) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @06:19AM (#38524148)
    Yes. And I don't mind having a reminder every other day.
    This is not just about SOPA...
  • Scr*w Godaddy (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 29, 2011 @06:22AM (#38524168)

    I had all my domains in Godaddy but I was fed up with trying to find the hidden option to manage my domains in pages and pages of advertisements.

    It seemed to me that, if I paid for a service, I don't want to be bombarded by ads every time I need to use this service.

    I moved to Namecheap and never looked back.

    • by Tvingo (229109)

      I had all my domains in Godaddy but I was fed up with trying to find the hidden option to manage my domains in pages and pages of advertisements.

      It seemed to me that, if I paid for a service, I don't want to be bombarded by ads every time I need to use this service.

      I moved to Namecheap and never looked back.

      Completely agree. The webpage is a absolute mess at GoDaddy. You would think that a company that is 'selling' the internet and setting up webpages would set a good example. I moved all my domains to Namecheap yesterday as well. Figured if I waited till today they may be too swamped ;) Hopefully Godaddy takes it in the purse for supporting this attack on our freedom.

    • by na1led (1030470)
      I was thinking of hosting a website with Go Daddy, I decided to go with IXWebHosting instead. I wonder how much business they are losing? It's not like they get lots of ignorant people who know nothing about whats going on.
  • by handsup (148536) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @06:24AM (#38524180) Homepage Journal

    This is not the first time GoDaddy is exposed. I remember transferring my domains from them years ago due to some other Bad Thing they did.

    It surprises me that they still are used by many high-profile sites who are now only transferring.

    • by Elbereth (58257) <krachtm@yahoo.com> on Thursday December 29, 2011 @06:53AM (#38524280) Homepage Journal

      It's human nature. If someone screws over a customer, a few outraged people will leave, but many others will stay, because the company never did anything to them. A couple on the sidelines will be wondering, "What the fuck is wrong with you? Right from the start, I could tell that company was slimy." And someone, somewhere will say, "It was his/her own fault for getting screwed. The company was perfectly justified in doing what it did. They're not a charity."

      As a smug asshole who loves to be right, this whole drama has been very fun. Not that I need the validation of the entire fucking internet coming around to my opinion or anything, but it's still nifty.

    • by David Gerard (12369) <slashdot@NOSpam.davidgerard.co.uk> on Thursday December 29, 2011 @07:16AM (#38524368) Homepage

      > It surprises me that they still are used by many high-profile sites who are now only transferring.

      The Wikimedia one was like:

      "WIKIPEDIA! WHY YOU USE GODADDY?!?!!"
      "... We do?"

      It's plumbing. No-one thinks about it. Until it turns out their plumber is HITLER. [citation needed]

      • > It's plumbing. No-one thinks about it.

        No, choosing a domain registrar is probably the most important decision an Internet-based company has to make in the early days after establishing a name and a business plan.

        There is too much "intellectual property" tied-up in a domain name nowadays to trust the like of GoDaddy, or indeed any registrar which doesn't state that the domain is your property

    • by elrous0 (869638) *

      There was a time when I would recommend GoDaddy as a host to my smaller clients. But their incredibly sleazy ad campaigns (that look more like ads for "Girls Gone Wild" videos than for a web hosting company) started to become so embarrassing that I stopped recommending them. I couldn't very well recommend them to a serious client only have that client catch one of their Hooters/strip-club ads during the Super Bowl.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 29, 2011 @06:45AM (#38524248)
    • by jampola (1994582)
      This, is news. This is REAL news and THIS is what should be on the front page of /.

      Anonymous Coward, thank you for what I think is the most informative link i've seen all day!
  • But.. (Score:5, Funny)

    by andrewa (18630) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @06:56AM (#38524288)
  • by Kplx138 (2523712) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @06:59AM (#38524294)

    Hopefully there will be a boycott and more boycotts if it fails to get the message across. Not something that should be given up on because it becomes all to hard and doesn't work the first time, after all how much do you value your freedom? Hell work to vote out every idiot that voted for it. Capitalism is supposed to be democratic, they tell you if people don't buy a product a company should understand that there's a problem with their product and rectify the problem or risk going out of business. Boycotts get that message across, worked well for south africa,

    I swear schools should teach kids how to organise boycotts right along side the importance of voting. Generations of kids coming up willing to drop massive boycotts on companies for even looking like doing something evil. When someone says that the market will work it out naturally they mean it'll correct itself eventually and I'll a load of cash in the meantime... oh I'm slightly off topic now.

  • For the next year (or so), this will be my counter-example when I debate politics with people who argue that a centrally regulated economy is better than the free market -- as in, "I will happily agree with you, if first you explain this one annoying fact please."

    * Constituents and businesses pleaded with Congress [the regulatory body of US "central economic planning"] not to pass SOPA. Congress did anyway.
    * People threaten to boycott GoDaddy (direct financial loss) due to supporting SOPA and they reverse

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Kplx138 (2523712)

      GoDaddy would have to cease to exist for me to believe the free market works, don't get me work I believe that free markets are a good thing but they need some amount of government regulation to balance out greedy dishonest a-holes.

      A lot of people say if we had a "true" free market with out any goverment regulations or interference it would all work out in the end. Much like communists will tell you that most communist states failed because they weren't "true" communism. It's all the speak of a true beli

    • by jez9999 (618189) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @08:03AM (#38524550) Homepage Journal

      For the next year (or so), this will be my counter-example when I debate politics with people who argue that a centrally regulated economy is better than the free market -- as in, "I will happily agree with you, if first you explain this one annoying fact please."

      OK, I'll try: domain registrars do not operate in a free market. They are regulated by ICANN [icann.org]. If they were in a truly free market, GoDaddy could (and almost certainly would) simply refuse to transfer any domains away from themselves.

      When you hear talk of a free market working and really look at it, you almost always find that the market isn't TRULY free; it needs regulation, and if that regulation weren't there it would be a disaster.

      I agree that domain registration is a relatively free market and this is an example of where a relatively free market works well. However it's not truly free; there's your explanation. In fact I suspect you'd be hard pressed to find any market that needs literally no regulation, to protect people's safety, or prohibit companies from screwing customers over.

      • by mangu (126918) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @08:40AM (#38524650)

        If they were in a truly free market, GoDaddy could (and almost certainly would) simply refuse to transfer any domains away from themselves.

        You seem to have fallen into the common mistake of thinking a free market is the same as anarchy.

        Free market is composed of "free" and "market". Market assumes a certain set of rules, among them the right to property. If you have a domain hosted at GoDaddy the domain is yours.

        GoDaddy refusing to accept transfer of domains would be like a commercial garage refusing to let people take their cars out. That would be theft, not freedom. What a free market means is that buyer and seller are free to negotiate among themselves the price and conditions of a sale. It does not mean someone is free to steal from someone else.

        • by jez9999 (618189)

          But who defines that a domain is property? The government, or the regulator. It's not necessarily obvious. And there are other various restrictions in place which make the market operate much better for the customer, too. The point is that whilst the definition of "market" may not be disputed, the definition of "free" is. Some of those big companies would pretty much like it to mean "anarchy" (wonder why?)

    • "... businesses are more responsive to their "constituents" then politicians are."
      You're partially right here, but the main difference is (supposed to be) that business is responsive per the formula "one dollar, one vote" rather than "one person, one vote".

      The US government has increasingly drifted away from the latter formula toward the former one, though.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I think you should realize that, for people like Adam Smith, free market literally meant "free of unnecessary charges" and a "market free from monopoly power, business fraud, political insider dealing and special privileges for vested interests". A "free market" particularly meant one free of foreign debt, as discussed in The Wealth of Nations. [blatantly taken from wikipedia]

      You have confused "free market" with "market free from regulation" (a.k.a. laissez-faire or libertarian economics). In fact, I would

    • by shentino (1139071)

      Actually politicians are VERY responsive to their constituents.

      It's just that Joe Voter and Jane Q. Public are not actually their constituents.

    • Try this analogy. How would it work if we "deregulated" football and hockey? Trust the players to regulate themselves. No more penalties. No more central authority to impose rules.

      Of course it would be complete chaos. While the dumber players were overdosing on steroids, the more cunning ones would be figuring ways to spike the opposing team's drinks with something debilitating, rigging the playing field for instance by widening the distance between the goal posts the visitors must defend, loading up

  • by cptBongo (1376805) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @07:14AM (#38524358)
    ...so I get the satisfaction of dumping them now.
    • by jez9999 (618189)

      That's like saying you're glad you got malaria so you could feel what it was like to be cured after a while. :-)

    • by 19061969 (939279)
      I'm thinking of getting a domain with GD just so I can dump them too ;-)
  • by robbak (775424) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @08:10AM (#38524572) Homepage

    I mean, how do we get lowlife scum like typo-squatters to boycott? Who else would tolerate them?

  • by iphinome (810750) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @08:17AM (#38524586)
    But then they took a SOPA to the knee.
  • by C_Kode (102755)

    GoDaddy also paid SCO at least $1M too. I would have left them then if I were a customer of theirs.

  • The unit of bandwidth is bits/second.

    The article mentions a bandwidth of 28 terabytes. Dimensional analysis shows that the unit of that is bits, not bits/s. What does this mean????

    • My understanding is this particular measure is 28 Terabytes/Day... so in bits per second it would go to...224teraBITS/Day which equals roughly .0026 TeraBITS/Sec... which is roughly 2.6megabits/sec.. 24 hours a day without a pause. Does that help clear it up, you monster?
  • Because I had so many domains with them I needed to call the support phone number to get them to produce a csv with all the auth codes, and surprisingly they answered quickly and did what I asked. They were very polite.

    When I said that SOPA was my reason for transferring, the call center guy asked whether it was GoDaddy's initial position or their later decisions that made me want to transfer. I told him that their initial stance was enough for me to leave, and that I've been a customer since their first

    • by cpghost (719344)

      When I said that SOPA was my reason for transferring, the call center guy asked whether it was GoDaddy's initial position or their later decisions that made me want to transfer.

      Apparently, management is still confused at GoDaddy, if they ask their support people to find out whether people are leaving because of their SOPA support or because of their reversal. That may explain their ambivalent press release: they can't make up their mind whether the majority of their customer base is anti- or pro-SOPA, and

  • Man up time. I am transferring domains off of godaddy, writing and calling Lamar Smith, and will get support from our county and city governments. It is time to put a stop to fear mongering, corporate control proxy, and censorship by the federal government. http://www.co.kerr.tx.us/ [kerr.tx.us]
  • I am paid through another 2 years for my Godaddy domain. As I already paid for the registration, if I transfer my domain to another registrar will GoDaddy refund the 2 years I didn't use?

  • that was a really well balanced article from fox news!!

  • by Frenzied Apathy (2473340) on Thursday December 29, 2011 @10:43AM (#38525648)
    As a web developer, I've worked on a couple of projects hosted at GoDaddy, and I can't stand anything about them - control panel overly confusing, unhelpful help section, horrible tech support, even their marketing (how can anyone take a web hosting company seriously that uses some hot chick to sell their business?). Every chance they get they throw some marketing pitch at you to get you to add on to your services.

    They've had plenty of bad press over the year, too: The GoDaddy Saga Continues [slashdot.org], GoDaddy Loses over 21000 Domains in One Day [slashdot.org], GoDaddy Reverses Course on SOPA, GoDaddy VP Caught Bidding Against Customers [slashdot.org].

    Every new client I get I recommend they not use GoDaddy - if they insist, I tell them to find another developer...

The universe is like a safe to which there is a combination -- but the combination is locked up in the safe. -- Peter DeVries

Working...