Quote:

I think you are starting to catch on to my point of this thread. With ebay, since they were being used as a 3rd party to illegal activity, they no longer allow illegal transactions esp from/to their own state of incorporation. Apparently, FA doesn't mind being 3rd party to ( hypothetical but easy to imagine) transactions like a NY high school student buying a taser that looks like a cell phone, for reasons we can only imagine. Point being, maybe they aren't technically legally responsible - but morally (or perhaps it turns out even legally?) it's something to think about.

maybe instead of whoring space for cheezy ad sites that are only 1 rung above 'Lieutenant X' scams, something else can be worked out to keep a free site afloat. they could ask e-budo how they manage to do it.

btw, I added a "?" to the thread title for you.



No... you're using this as a soapbox to push your ethics and morality under the pretext of "legality" which are mutually exclusive. You are dictating how the site and its owners should act, which is a business ethics issue, by shrouding it in the veil of potential illegality.

BTW, the underhanded way in which you posed the title speaks to your ethics and mores, rather than your ignorance, and by implication, the ignorance of the site owners and their legal counsel who is responsible for drafting the TOS.