MORE: re: "My point was that there really is not much within the "Erotic Services" category that (at the end of the day) is not prostitution. Wink wink. we all know this. Let's get real."
Hi, Johan! unless you believe Craig's "update response" *does* in fact address the very good issues you raised (I don't see how it could possibly do that), you may consider bringing these things up in other places where people may indeed care... Take care! D.
...
a lot more people seem to have figured things out...
e.g. Tom Barlow: (3rd paragraph)"While craigslist continues to operate with an org extension, it is not a not-for-profit, which I feel is deceitful."
Delia
Thursday, November 20, 2008
things that make me think Craig is getting paid
for some of the glowing endorsements on his blog.
eg. hmmm... why would somebody who doesn't get fashion read about it? (should there be a disclosure for this glowing endorsement?) D.
P.S. http://www.cnewmark.com/2008/08/i-dont-get-fash.html
eg. hmmm... why would somebody who doesn't get fashion read about it? (should there be a disclosure for this glowing endorsement?) D.
P.S. http://www.cnewmark.com/2008/08/i-dont-get-fash.html
Thursday, November 6, 2008
(knowledge of illegality) is craigslist legally obligated to do something?
STILL MORE:
EVEN MORE: CL User: as far as I can tell, if KIM is doing something illegal and posting it on craigslist, craigslist is legally obligated to remove her ads once it is made aware of the fact. I believe Sarah gave them all the information she needed to give them (they could have easily verified if KIM has a license to run a charity or not.
Delia
P.S. I believe posting on the craigslist boards regarding such things is a waste of time (look how much good it did regarding prostitution before Blumenthal got involved) D.
MORE: CLuser:
re:"Again, this is not the right place to be airing such grievances." --> I agree, Sarah would do much better to contact people like Richard Blumenthal who are in the position to *make* craigslist do something about it... (like he did re: prostitution)
what more could craigslist want Sarah to do than tell them this?:"There is a fake charity in Skowhegan ME. I contacted the Town office and Dept of State. This KIM has no license to run a charity."
all craigslist would have had to do is do what Sarah did (for *them*) -- pick up the phone and verify that KIM has no license to run a charity --> this would have taken less time and effort than emailing back and forth and demanding that *Sarah* PROVES what she just told them (how ridiculous)
Delia
P.S. they are apparently annoyed that she found out there is something illegal going on and would like her to shut up and move on... D.
....
(comment-138079190) CL user: you are talking like a "crazy person", yourself:)... -- "the systems" just don't work in the vast majority of cases (nowhere enough craigslist "customer service" people)
Delia
P.S. apparently, Craig & Co just don't want to spend the money so people like Sarah are just left to talk to themselves until they figure out they are just wasting their time and move on...
P.P.S. assuming Craig reads the comments (fair assumption I would think -- there really aren't that many), Sarah has publicly (on his blog) brought to his attention that something clearly illegal keeps being posted in a particular place on craigslist -- I would think that this would make craigslist legally obligated to do something about it... but I could be wrong... D.
EVEN MORE: CL User: as far as I can tell, if KIM is doing something illegal and posting it on craigslist, craigslist is legally obligated to remove her ads once it is made aware of the fact. I believe Sarah gave them all the information she needed to give them (they could have easily verified if KIM has a license to run a charity or not.
Delia
P.S. I believe posting on the craigslist boards regarding such things is a waste of time (look how much good it did regarding prostitution before Blumenthal got involved) D.
MORE: CLuser:
re:"Again, this is not the right place to be airing such grievances." --> I agree, Sarah would do much better to contact people like Richard Blumenthal who are in the position to *make* craigslist do something about it... (like he did re: prostitution)
what more could craigslist want Sarah to do than tell them this?:"There is a fake charity in Skowhegan ME. I contacted the Town office and Dept of State. This KIM has no license to run a charity."
all craigslist would have had to do is do what Sarah did (for *them*) -- pick up the phone and verify that KIM has no license to run a charity --> this would have taken less time and effort than emailing back and forth and demanding that *Sarah* PROVES what she just told them (how ridiculous)
Delia
P.S. they are apparently annoyed that she found out there is something illegal going on and would like her to shut up and move on... D.
....
(comment-138079190) CL user: you are talking like a "crazy person", yourself:)... -- "the systems" just don't work in the vast majority of cases (nowhere enough craigslist "customer service" people)
Delia
P.S. apparently, Craig & Co just don't want to spend the money so people like Sarah are just left to talk to themselves until they figure out they are just wasting their time and move on...
P.P.S. assuming Craig reads the comments (fair assumption I would think -- there really aren't that many), Sarah has publicly (on his blog) brought to his attention that something clearly illegal keeps being posted in a particular place on craigslist -- I would think that this would make craigslist legally obligated to do something about it... but I could be wrong... D.
(craigslist prostitution) Congratulations Blumenthal!
Sunday, October 19, 2008
(craigslist "foundation") now, why would the foundation of a corporation...
... that's been making a whole lot money for a very long time need someone *else* to sponsor it? how ridiculous... D.
Monday, October 6, 2008
a breath of fresh air: William Reardon
EVEN MORE: (10th comment) I don't know if it is really disingenuity, William -- most of the articles on craigslist/Craig Newmark are just plain fiction... (and a good part of these writers appear to honestly believe the fairy tale). D.
MORE: (6th comment) he would probably say that it just *so happened*... so far:)... and it may not be untrue -- I suspect he is quite capable of switching "political sympathies" if the "price" is right: say, all in a sudden republicans favored such things as "net neutrality" (which would mean serious money for craigslist and, of course, for him, as the owner of a big chunk of it) D
Hi, William! (4th comment; #comment-16557)
I don't know if you noticed but he sort of answered this on twitter:
"I contribute to the best people,regardless of affiliation"
http://twitter.com/craignewmark/statuses/947880022
Delia
P.S. I don't know if you are aware (I suspect not) but he appears to have contributed to NAMBLA (http://craigslistcriticism.blogspot.com/2007/05/craig-and-nambla-north-american-man-boy.html) -- I wish somebody would really look into this...
P.P.S glad I came across somebody else who is not talking his word as gospel -- keep it up!:) D.
MORE: (6th comment) he would probably say that it just *so happened*... so far:)... and it may not be untrue -- I suspect he is quite capable of switching "political sympathies" if the "price" is right: say, all in a sudden republicans favored such things as "net neutrality" (which would mean serious money for craigslist and, of course, for him, as the owner of a big chunk of it) D
Hi, William! (4th comment; #comment-16557)
I don't know if you noticed but he sort of answered this on twitter:
"I contribute to the best people,regardless of affiliation"
http://twitter.com/craignewmark/statuses/947880022
Delia
P.S. I don't know if you are aware (I suspect not) but he appears to have contributed to NAMBLA (http://craigslistcriticism.blogspot.com/2007/05/craig-and-nambla-north-american-man-boy.html) -- I wish somebody would really look into this...
P.P.S glad I came across somebody else who is not talking his word as gospel -- keep it up!:) D.
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Craig's own press: the never ending stream of naive reporters...
EVEN MORE: comic relief: (2nd comment; #comment-133645293) "*definitely*,much too "kind"... suppose she would have pointed out what would "net neutrality" mean for you/craigslist *financially* :)... (just to put things in perspective for the readers like competent reporters do...) D.
MORE: sure enough... and he does a lot more than just hope -- he uses his tech-advisor-to-the Obama-campaign position to spin things in his favor (how is it possible to just print what he says without mentioning that Craig/craigslist would financially benefit from this?) and then he gets away with having the press print his diatribe on corrupt lobbyists (6th paragraph) when he appears to do the same thing himself: claims grass root support without disclosing that he/craigslist has a big financial interest in the issue... D.
Kim Heart: (2nd paragraph, 3rd sentence) "[Craig] admits he has 'nothing to gain' from helping get Obama elected." --> well... there is a whole story behind that... Craig's choice of candidates appears to have been heavily influenced by the fact that Obama was the one candidate who said he was going to be for "network neutrality," which would greatly favor Craig/craigslist...financially... now, when it came down to voting, Obama didn't carry through... so it may be that it is true that Craig is not going to get anything out of it... but he must at least hope he can turn it around... D.
MORE: sure enough... and he does a lot more than just hope -- he uses his tech-advisor-to-the Obama-campaign position to spin things in his favor (how is it possible to just print what he says without mentioning that Craig/craigslist would financially benefit from this?) and then he gets away with having the press print his diatribe on corrupt lobbyists (6th paragraph) when he appears to do the same thing himself: claims grass root support without disclosing that he/craigslist has a big financial interest in the issue... D.
Kim Heart: (2nd paragraph, 3rd sentence) "[Craig] admits he has 'nothing to gain' from helping get Obama elected." --> well... there is a whole story behind that... Craig's choice of candidates appears to have been heavily influenced by the fact that Obama was the one candidate who said he was going to be for "network neutrality," which would greatly favor Craig/craigslist...financially... now, when it came down to voting, Obama didn't carry through... so it may be that it is true that Craig is not going to get anything out of it... but he must at least hope he can turn it around... D.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
sorry about the delay... (was away for the day)
CLuser: sorry but I do not wish to follow you anywhere or anything of the kind (I've already said everything I had to say to you)
Sarah: I think you've done pretty much everything you could have done under the circumstances (and definitely a lot more than craigslist could have reasonably expected you to do)
If you really want to do more about this, I would contact legal institutions. If you have trouble with the local ones and believe they are corrupt or non-responsive for some reason, I'd go up the ladder.
Richard Blumenthal, although not the attorney general for your particular state is very familiar with craigslist issues so he would make a prime candidate if there is a way to just drop him a line somewhere (I'd keep it short and to the point, with hyperlinks to what you see as evidence and with a short story of what you've done so far including your contacting craigslist).
Delia
P.S. OK... I'm entirely done with this topic (didn't realize it was going to get this involved). D.
Take care everyone!
Delia