At another board I go to, there's a thread on pro-anorexia sites (like this (http://www.livejournal.com/users/pro_anorexia/) community). Would you host any sites that promoted eating disorders? If so, why or why not? If you found out one of your customers hosted a pro-ana site, would you shut it down?

It depends really, on one hand its up to your clients what they put on their sites. On the other i dont agree with sites like that and i would probably take an ethical stance and say that i was unable to host a website like that.
You may also get stick from people who have had family or friends suffering from eating disorders and they may try to blacken your name.

I really wouldn't care...

As long as the content is legal, I leave my ethical and moral stances at the door when it comes to business....

Everyone has a right to voice their own opion....

As long as their site is within the parameters of our TOS, they can put up whatever they want.

Would you not host a bands website because you didnt like their music?

Not sure about the pro-eating, but there our some things I wont do/host even if it means loosing some clients, simply put... my principles and ethics are more important then money. Just my $0.02 :)

Originally posted by SuperDon
Would you not host a bands website because you didnt like their music?

I would say that is pretty different, eating disorders are a serious medical condition which can lead to people dieing, they are also a very controversial issue.
Disliking someones music is just a personal opinion

Controversial but not illegal…..do we really have the right to censor?

The music thing was just an analogy, I realise that in reality the two are completely different. Dont want to get too deep.

Ah geez....BIG DEAL.

Who cares if someone likes to promote eating disorders. What a petty lil` thing to be concerned about.

:rolleyes:

I personally don't think that I have the right to police the internet. If it does not violate our TOS it does not get touched. I agree with The Prohacker; morals and ethics shouldn't be brought into your business and the few that you do want to be brought should be written in your TOS if you want to enforce them.

should be written in your TOS if you want to enforce them.

You're kidding-- you don't have "we have the right to terminate any account at any time for any reason" written in your TOS? Perhaps you should see a lawyer.

I've got it in mine, and pro-suicide sites would fall under that.

Originally posted by Lain
At another board I go to, there's a thread on pro-anorexia sites (like this (http://www.livejournal.com/users/pro_anorexia/) community). Would you host any sites that promoted eating disorders? If so, why or why not? If you found out one of your customers hosted a pro-ana site, would you shut it down?

My only real criteria is "is it illegal" if not, I let it in, my ethical and moral outlook is overshadowed about my vehement support for free speech.

My support for free speech stops where the C&D's start, however.

Yes we do have that in our TOS. But just because that is in your TOS doesn't mean you should go and cancel all of your accounts just because you can. It's only in there so you have something to protect you if you get sued because someone thinks that allowing free downloads of commercial programs arent warez or showing people how to port scan a server isn't hacker related.

Of course every host is going to have their own opinion on what falls under that clause, many of the things that will fall under that clause are moral related. I personally will not cancel an account because it isn't moral to me. If I can't think of any other reason to cancel an account other than because of my personal morals, I will not cancel it. Now, if it uses too much CPU or Memory or falls under any of the unacceptable conditions in our TOS I will cancel it.

Think of it like this.. say you always watch a certian tv show and the tv station decides to no longer show it because it didn't fit into their morals. Wouldn't you be mad? I know I would.

Originally posted by Lurleene


You're kidding-- you don't have "we have the right to terminate any account at any time for any reason" written in your TOS? Perhaps you should see a lawyer.

I've got it in mine, and pro-suicide sites would fall under that.

If you have any intention of being fair with potential customers, you should warn them in advance that you plan to scrutinize their web content and may delete their account if you find issues that create personal or ethical conflicts for you.

You could create a list for them so they don't have to wonder where your conflicts are, or email you in advance.

By all means, host whoever you want, host only people who share your values if you like. Tell them you feel that way up front. If you already know for certain that you would delete sites with certain content and you don't disclose that up front, you might have your own ethical problem to deal with. You might even drive someone to suicide. ;) (Rejected yet again, with no warning.) IMHO, you have an ethical obligation to disclose your terms more accurately than "we have the right to terminate any account at any time for any reason" when you know specific reasons for which you would cancel accounts.

Originally posted by Lain
At another board I go to, there's a thread on pro-anorexia sites (like this (http://www.livejournal.com/users/pro_anorexia/) community). Would you host any sites that promoted eating disorders? As for that particular site, I wouldn't see any problem with it. Whatever the title might imply, I don't see the content as being "pro anorexia," which to me would imply that they're saying something like that people should be anorexic or should choose to develop eating disorders. It seems, judging by actual content, to just be a support group for people who do have those disorders. Reading the posts, none of them seem to be happy about their conditions or situations, and many are undergoing treatments. Seems like they're just saying they don't want to debate it, they don't want other people making value judgements, so they make that kind of stuff definitively off topic.

Originally posted by SuperDon
Controversial but not illegal…..do we really have the right to censor?



Of course you do, it's your server - you have the right to allow or disallow whatever you please.

-Bob

Originally posted by TMX


Of course you do, it's your server - you have the right to allow or disallow whatever you please.

-Bob


And you have the ethical obligation to do it openly and proudly.

Question: Would you refund their money if you terminated their a/c?

Personally, out of respect for others' beliefs and freedom of speech, yes, I would host sites like that.

Originally posted by xerocity.com
morals and ethics shouldn't be brought into your business and the few that you do want to be brought should be written in your TOS if you want to enforce them.

This makes no sense whatsoever. THINK!

Do you only follow moral and ethical guidelines at home? at your church 1 hour a week?

Lack of morals and ethics is what drove scandals like ENRON; like the investigations of Wall Street analysts being comp'd on driving business rather than objective, factual, honest moral analysis.

Lack of morals and ethics are generally the root problem behind most societal ills.

Morals and ethics have every place in business.

If one's business is so weak that you can't afford to turn down a few dollars a month to host a site or two that clearly is outside the scope of society's norm - do not harm individuals in this case - then I suggest that person's business won't last anyway.

Do I practice what I preach - you bet. I've "fired clients" worth much more than a few dollars a month. I've not sought after business that I considered unethical. I don't trade stocks in companies I consider immoral - tobacco ranks right up there for me.

There are many ways of making a buck while keeping your integrity. /soapbox mode off - sorry! :)

PS, business and politics - exactly where morals and ethics are required. Look at all the positioning by Bush on Cuba... all because of an election for his brother.

Yet his administration made it easy for China to join the WTO. There is far more oppression going on in China yet no blockade on US business interests exists there - quite the contrary.

Why? Profit.

Or we could look at US administration caving into protectionist measures due to coming elections, yet the administration professes to be "free traders".

Ethics and morals be damned LOL!

Originally posted by mwatkins


This makes no sense whatsoever. THINK!

Do you only follow moral and ethical guidelines at home? at your church 1 hour a week?

Lack of morals and ethics is what drove scandals like ENRON; like the investigations of Wall Street analysts being comp'd on driving business rather than objective, factual, honest moral analysis.

Lack of morals and ethics are generally the root problem behind most societal ills.

Morals and ethics have every place in business.

If one's business is so weak that you can't afford to turn down a few dollars a month to host a site or two that clearly is outside the scope of society's norm - do not harm individuals in this case - then I suggest that person's business won't last anyway.

Do I practice what I preach - you bet. I've "fired clients" worth much more than a few dollars a month. I've not sought after business that I considered unethical. I don't trade stocks in companies I consider immoral - tobacco ranks right up there for me.

There are many ways of making a buck while keeping your integrity. /soapbox mode off - sorry! :)

I think that it makes alot of sense.

In the US the first amendment to the bill of rights states that everyone has the freedom of speech. What I was saying is that if you want to infringe on someones freedom of speech you should state it in your TOS.

You may as well put in your TOS "If your website isn't normal, I am going to remove it... If I don't agree with your website, I am going to remove it... If your website deals with politics, I am going to remove it... If your site mentions anyone or anything, I am going to remove it... If you host with us, I am going to remove it." :eek: ...maybe I am getting a little carried away :)

example: in our TOS we state.... [forbidden content] ...informational websites related to malicious attacks on other servers (including, but not limited to, denial of service attacks, mail bombs, hack attacks, spamming, port scanning or port probing),... [is prohibited].

I am personally very much against spamming. In my opinion it is immoral to make someone deal with email that they did not request. Now because I think a spam related site is immoral does not mean that I will remove it (and infringe on the owners freedom of speech). But, in this case we added it to our TOS because we felt it usually ends up damaging the server that is hosting it not just morally/ethically wrong.

If this pro-anorexia site was on my server I would not remove it because it isn't in our TOS and I do not think that it would negatively effect our servers. They are merely expressing that they are pro-anorexia.

... I have a feeling this is going to be one of those threads that will never end....

I would not host such a site promoting what has become an epidemic among our teenagers and can destroy their lives. And I am not infringing on their rights to free speech, just exercising my right not to be involved in their activities. It is perfectly within one's legal rights to refuse to host it and, in my opinion, within my moral obligation not to be involved.

Morals and ethics are a very individual thing. However, they are not part-time, something to be turned on and off at our will. Over my life, I have had to make decisions that weighed financial gain against principles I hold dear to me. I have chosen to stick by my principles. Maybe I could have been wealthier had I traveled the other path, but I would be much poorer in the way I feel about myself.

Hold on now, this has NOTHING to do with free speech.

Until a single webhost is made on behalf of the government and runs all web hosting decides, free speech isn't an issue -- as any first year political science student can tell you, freedom of speech is in relation to government (and government backed) restrictions. The govt. can't stop you from having a site based on your expressed ideas, a host can.

Businesses all over the world make moral choices. Some choose to do things like take a certain advertiser (i.e. alcohol or cigarettes) or print a picture (i.e. a near-nude model) they don’t like because they need/want the money. That's a choice, it's not bad, it's not great, and it’s THEIR CHOICE.

Other companies choose to loose the money and NOT take some business. Again, this is neither good nor bad, it is simply their decision.

This host's decision not to host a site does not stop the site from existing. The webmaster has thousands of other choices, he's not being denied any rights that he was entitled to, the host infact is utilizing HIS RIGHT to make a statement.

While it may be bad for business to go around banning clients because you don't like their content, that doesn't mean it isnt allowed and there isn’t a time and a place. Many hosts disallow bulk email, porn, celebrity sites, racist sites, etc.... While these sites may be legal, hosts still make the moral decision not to host them. If this was a question about hosting some pro Nazi site I imagine people would change their tune real quick.

The bottom line is simple. Eating disorders cause death, depression and other not so great things. If someone wants to promote any type of eating disorder for any reason that is there right. But no business, not a host, not a bank, no one has to provide services to them unless they are funded by or part of the government. There are clearly some other laws that come into play when you begin to discriminate on certain basis (ie no one of this race can be hosted here) but that's a bit down the road. If this guy or anyone else decides to close an account and loose the money, that's their choice. There is a reason that businesses everywhere use the statement "we reserve the right to refuse service", this is that reason.

Should you go around taking down every site that you dislike? No, not at all but when that one comes along, MAYBE you will, that's OK. Should you try and warn clients? Yea, it's that same clause I mentioned and many other people mentioned -- they've been warned.

In most of business morals are left out because, well, profit comes first. But that's the nice thing about being a small business owner, you get to run things you way (somewhat). If that means saying get lost to a client you feel is wrong, that's your choice. The client will go elsewhere, run their site and have no problems. You loose a few bucks and sleep a little better or not, but that's still your choice.