Ebay Buys Into Craiglist 171
unboring writes "The news out today morning is that eBay has bought a minority stake in Craigslist. Here's Craig's take on the whole issue. For those unaware of Craigslist, it was launched by Craig Newmark in 1995 in San Francisco, and is an online network of classified ads and forums aimed at people looking to find an apartment rental, meet friends or trade goods. For those unaware of eBay, get out from under that rock! Google news stories for your convenience here. So will Craigslist now become more corporate/evil? Personally, I've benefited a lot from Craigslist classifieds and I hope it doesn't lose its attitude."
Ebay takes the hook? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm thinking that eBay was either thinking along those same lines or they were convinced by the article's claims.
The Return of the Bubble (Score:2, Interesting)
Craigslist works well for a reason (Score:5, Interesting)
I've avoided ebay because I prefer local not global. I may be the only one that does not trust a buyer I do not meet. Ebay is not free or allowing annonomous email.
My hope is Craig keeps it simple and free. I still have lots of stuff I plan to sell and do not need the hassles of ebay. I doubt ebay can effectily morph to meet local and face to face transactions. certainly not for free...
Re:former employee sold the stake (Score:3, Interesting)
This is a hodgepodge and makes no sense. Craigslist is already supporting 11 people's livelihoods and, last I checked, they were working in an office. Who then do you mean by "People"? Nobody's talking about CL being owned by anybody yet, but it's ominous that eBay will be able to affect the direction of Craigslist at all. Craigslist's resistance to the profit motive has had nothing to do with their ability to make living working on a website that is so useful to so many.
Re:eBay you say? (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously, what kind of mouthbreathing moron does it take to post something like that on someone's feedback as if they really think it's helpful or even makes any sense?
I've always wondered how eBay turns otherwise courteous and intelligent individuals into blibbering sheep while they're entering feedback.
These people can write coherent, useful descriptions of items, communicate fine via email, and then they leave you a comment like the what the parent listed above. I don't get it.
Terms of service (Score:2, Interesting)
OK, fine. Terms of service. What else is new? Thanks to the size of the screen, I bothered to read it. Apparently, some
After reading the terms however, I got pretty hot, and posted my opinion [craigslist.org] of the terms, on the help board, since the opinion on the terms was specifically asked for
The corporation of Craig's list, now partly owned by Ebay, can using its own opinion, fine you for what they consider improper posts. How's that grab you?
Wanna fight it? Go to court in San Francisco.
I gave my opinion, and the post being 2 1/2 months ago, surmised that Craig's list was being positioned for sale [craigslist.org]. I was called a troll [craigslist.org].
Anticipating some responses, just finding out that a partner is selling his share to Ebay? Maybe so. But it sounds like a little research went into finding out if it could be prevented, and it also sounds like (and is likely whether it sounds like it or not) there were some consultations and/or meetings with Ebay prior to and during the sale negotiations and legal work.
So was I hit with a bout of ESP? Or did Craig call me a troll when he knew something more? That's besides the point, anyway. The point is the terms allow the Craig's list corporation, now partly owned by Ebay, to fine you for what in their sole opinion, consider an improper post. Note that improper post isn't reserved just to abusive posts. Posting in more than one category (something real estate agents do all the time) in more than one area, depending on the circumstances, may be a fineable offense. There are other grey areas (how about real estate ads that take ten days to expire, yet some posters are deleting their ads every few days, and reposting them so they stay at the top nearly every day. Is that something you would consider abusive? Not when I pointed it out. What if it's done daily?) There are a lot of other grey examples, where, is it/isn't it, and according to the terms, there is no warning, bam, you're hit with a fine (regardless of whether the hammer has ever been lowered on anyone, the potential is there because it's in the terms), and if you have a problem with it, go fight it in San Francisco.
This is something you really don't think about, until you become aware of the potential problems. I'd think the guy reposting his ad every 1-2 days was abusing the system, but in the opinion of Craig's list, it wasn't. But after reading the tos, I started looking at a lot of other posts (read the part about posting in more than one area, and there are other examples), and started wondering, for other items I was listing, am I going to get fined over this post, or this one? Or this one? Then go look at some posts that are posted in more than one area, but seem perfectly legitimate. And they are still there, even though they are in technical violation of the tos.
Some of the
Re:Nervous? A little (Score:3, Interesting)
Walks Like Corporate A PR Release.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, Craig incorporated. Otherwise, he -- personally -- would carry all the financial obligation and risk for anything related to his business. Only a fool would choose to run the risk of bankrupting himself if his business goes under.
Of course, it is expected that Slashdot -- part of the OSTG corporation would pander to the bigotry of its fantasy-ridden core audience.