Microsoft Hotmail Domain Reward Check on E*Bay 295
Big_Joe wrote to us with the continuing story of Michael Chaney. Michael is the guy who paid the re-registration fee for the Hotmail domain name, after Microsoft had failed to over the Christmas holiday. He's auctioning the 500$ "thank you" check off on E*Bay and has pledged to donate the winning bid to charity, as well as matching up to $2,000 of that out of his own pocket.
Re:Ebay Link (Score:1)
It is a not an accident... KATZ WHERE ARE YOU? (Score:1)
Once one Mike takes over, they all take over and the world ends just after the sky falls.
Katz, why aren't you on this one, huh? Is your middle name Mike?
Re:Ebay Link (Score:1)
Re:what charity? (Score:1)
New /. Moderation option : Egocentric (Score:1)
NO! (Score:1)
--
Microsoft employees (Score:1)
Re:Hype-P-O's in miniature.... (Score:1)
I see where you're headed, and I almost agree.
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that _demand_ for such a 'collectible,' the fact that anyone KNOWS the story, is a function of media attention. Yes, the history exists, but there are all SORTS of checks out there with much more interesting stories attached that aren't getting sold on eBay for 10x face value.
Which was the point I was equating back to a "Hype-P-O" -- demand, attention, fame, being artificially inflated around an object due to overattention to its story. It can happen to a company; it can happen to a piece of paper.
--
Re:Hype-P-O's in miniature.... (Score:1)
The only thing that makes this particular check worth more than its face value or in any way 'collectible' is the story behind it, the 'well-documented history' that you point out. Which in this case is the media hype. Which was my point.
--
speaking of opensrs... (Score:1)
...j
(being a tightwad and all)
Re:Charity Hypocrisy (Score:1)
You are missing the point: not the SUM is important ! The percent of the donator's wealth wich is donated is what that matters. Its easy to donate when you have bilions but much harder when you only have money for survival (or less). You obviously haven't experienced this. Take back this *hypocrisy* thing, it only make you look like you are one. ---- Off topic and redundant - I know...
Re:Are these bid legit? (Score:1)
Believe it or not, there are plenty of people who use computers daily who have never felt the need to check out eBay.
Re:he's already decided who he's going to donate t (Score:1)
Noone here must read the attached links.
He's vying for brand recognition! (Score:1)
Can't you see that Michael Chaney is just trying to build brand? He has already registered MichaelChaney.com (see http://www.michaelchaney.com/ [michaelchaney.com]), and, I'd wager, is planning on selling the domain on eBay for $10 million once his fame has pinnacled.
Re:a better man than me. (Score:1)
Uh, you might want to stick to NT. FYI, MS matches its employee's donations to charity. If he worked for Microsoft, MS would donate $2k to a charity of his choice if he did as well.
Re:On going PR stunt (Score:1)
And for his consulting business, no doubt. $2,000 is a modest investment for the PR he is getting.
Re:Yeah, what's with the moderation (Score:1)
Do you blame them? I have mine set to 1 or Higher, and sometimes think about setting it up another notch...
Maybe that's what the check is for (Score:1)
Re:Proof The Guy's An Annoying Git (Score:1)
The only reason he registered the domain name was to put Microsoft into an embarassing situation (he only beat them to registering it by a couple of minutes).
a) He didn't register the domain. He paid a delinquent bill. The domain was placed on hold by Network Solutions but was in no danger of being released for someone else to register for at least 90-120 days.
b) By paying the bill when he did, the guy saved hours of Hotmail downtime, benefitting several hundred thousand users at least.
Now he's just draggin it on and on... Get over it pal, it may have been mildly amusing at first, now it's just pathetic. You're 15 minutes are up, let it go.
He's using media attention to help a worthy charity. What's wrong with that?
Re:Why bid on this? (Score:1)
Polls and Trolls (Score:1)
What does pointing a bunch of people to an online poll have to do with putting spurious bids on a very expensive auction??? We're comparing apples and oranges here. There's nothing wrong with "stuffing" an online poll. I've seen it done by many different groups. I'm sure that MS zealots do it too. Anyone STOOPID enough to trust the statistical validity of an online poll as anything more than a popularity contest deserves whatever lousy data they get.
HOWEVER, if some troll comes along and puts in a $5000 bid for something they have no intention of honoring (how much you willing to wager that "linuxsux" is really going to pay for that check?) smacks of a p***k the size of Long Island.
On the other hand, if he really is going to pay up, then there's no reason why a Linux hater shouldn't be able to bid on and buy that particular piece of memorabilia. It's an auction open to all - Political Correctness not required.
(Didn't they just have a similar problem with that T-Rex they tried to auction for $5M on eBay? They had so many fake bids that they decided to move it to another site that validated the identity of the bidder before accepting. It seems like the eBay model quickly breaks down when you get over a thousand $$ or so...)
Re:Moderation Totals:Offtopic=1, Flamebait=2, Funn (Score:1)
Re:Moderation Totals:Offtopic=1, Flamebait=2, Funn (Score:1)
Re:Charity Hypocrisy (Score:1)
100 billion net work Gates -> 16 billion = 16%
50000 net work for that guy, donate 5k = 10%
Bye for now.
No wait he'll owe tax on the 5000. (Score:1)
Somebody call a tax accountant, please. :-)
Oy, that reminds me I need to start doing mine. *moan*
Re:Microsoft matching and charity (Score:2)
Re:Hype-P-O's in miniature.... (Score:2)
Without public awareness of this incident, it would be a $35 transaction; it's the hype around it that makes MS's check for $500 worth many times that.
--
Hype-P-O's in miniature.... (Score:2)
Not sure if this is a good or bad thing, but it is certainly an interesting thing to watch....
--
He should have done an IPO... (Score:2)
Chaney is playing a pretty canny game here; he's certainly "profiting" in terms of publicity, and the fact that the amounts are to be donated to charity means nobody can sting him on being greedy for money.
I think it's extremely clever of him to auction off the cheque, as this permits us to get a picture of how much the "rest of the world" considers the matter to be valued at. This is most certainly an economically efficient outcome, as it can't but provide a valuation of at least $500.
And it shows us how insane peoples' valuations of the matter are; if it sorts out at $5000, this shows that someone considers that having a cheque for $500 from Microsoft is worth $5000.
Of course, what he should have done is to start a company whose sole asset is the cheque, and do an IPO.
Betcha he'd be a billionaire by now!
$2,750 (Score:2)
and 2750+2500= $5250.00 for charity!
It keeps on going, and going, and going!
Re:Hmmm (Score:2)
Yeah, what's with the moderation (Score:2)
Re:Worse are the trolls.. (Score:2)
Then of course, all of the Linux lemmings go and 'stuff' the poll to "make sure" Linux is #1.
That really disgusts me too. What about you?
Tax deductions may pay his 2500 and more. (Score:2)
So, let me get this right. Somebody is going to pay Chaney x dollars, where x >= 5000. Chaney is going to donate x + 2500 to a charity. Chaney deducts at least 7500 from his taxable income. Depending on his bracket, this guy could make out quite well.
Cool.
Re:Motive explained (Score:2)
Had I thought of it (as if) I would have done it simply as a cute trick, or simply to see if it worked (hacker ethic?). After that, I'd just be trying to ride the publicity wave for as long as possible, while promoting things I care about (SETI [seti.org] & Bluetooth [bluetooth.net] for me - Linux & Nashville's Table for him).
Re:Makes You Think (Score:2)
Re:Hype-P-O's in miniature.... (Score:2)
Re:I hate to be suspicious, but... (Score:2)
Seriously, you can't believe that exposure doesn't lead to sales (and lack of exposure results in fewer sales). Just look at Coke.
Re:I hate to be suspicious, but... (Score:2)
The loss is probably a large absolute amount (relative to a normal company), a small percentage (relative to the MS empire), but certainly is non-zero.
Re:Hype-P-O's in miniature.... (Score:2)
Re:Hype-P-O's in miniature.... (Score:2)
Re:I hate to be suspicious, but... (Score:2)
Re:Info on the charity (Score:2)
Are you a registered non-profit organization? This isn't a "let's throw a few $$$'s around just for the fun of it." You have to get that tax benefit.
-BrentIt proves no such thing (Score:2)
Maybe he's doing this in response to the people saying he was doing it for monetary gain, just to prove them wrong. What he's doing now doesn't indicate what was going through his mind in the past. Secondly, maybe he was doing it all along to grab his own 15 minutes of fame. His latest efforts could be evidence of that, if he thinks $2000 is worth the new round of publicity that he'll get for this. I'm not knocking the guy or anyone else who's donating to charity, but again, what he's doing now doesn't prove anything about his original intent.
On another note, a shady "charity" has a good opportunity to get themselves a quickie 2000 bucks: ZicoCare Charities, Inc. outbids everyone else for the check and names ZicoCare Charities, Inc. as the targeted charity, thereby getting back the money they put in, plus Mr. Chaney's $2000 in matching funds. Oh well, food for thought.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
ebay fees (Score:2)
If the auction ended now, the total fees would be $59.80
========
Re:Hmm (Score:2)
He can't steal or otherwise mess with it, or he'd be a meatwaffle in court.
He could just do nothing.. and. well.. do nothing..
or he can pay it, and get is 10 minutes of fame.
Karma gifts (Score:2)
Well, the idea of bestowing karma gifts on others is interesting and might work, but I don't think you should be able to take it back. That could lead to all sorts of bad situations... blackmail being the first that comes to mind. (Yah, I know, it's just Slashdot, but hey, if it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.) Gifts should be gifts. No "Indian givers", please.
Besides, moderators should take care of any one who get gifts and turns out to be a looser. Same as they do now.
Nothing odd about giving to charity (Score:2)
Or perhaps he was planning on making a significant donation already, and decided to make it more of an event?
People have certainly spend far more than $2500 on far less worthy causes.
Re:Moderation Totals:Offtopic=1, Flamebait=2, Funn (Score:2)
Re:I hate to be suspicious, but... (Score:2)
He got up out of the bath, and decided he needed compensation. So he decided that he was going to 'donate' the money to his own bank account, never a charity to see it.
He was promptly charged with Dishonestly Obtaining Financial Advantage By Deception.
Re:Charity Hypocrisy (Score:2)
100 billion net worth for Gates, donate 5 billion = 5%.
50000 net worth for this guy, donate 5k = 10%.
Also, doesn't Gates donations really go to a charity that is a thinly-disguised Microsoft promotion machine?
Re:Charity being supported;thoughts (Score:2)
The main modification I'd make, though, would be to make Karma degrade over time. I'm on 30ish right now (which is nothing spectacular in the grand scheme of things) so it'd take quite a bit of trolling for me to lose my +1 bonus. That isn't right.
The point is, people change. Why should I be rewarded in two years time for making good posts - in the opinions of some moderators
It'd also be interesting to see auto +1's appearing in meta moderation to se if we could lost Karma that way...
Greg
Re:charity (Score:2)
I fully agree on your 2nd comment though. Maybe Hemos can ask him to do next weeks
----------------------------------------------
Re:I dunno... (Score:2)
--
Re:Can somebody tell me... (Score:2)
Three cheers for Michael Chaney! (Score:2)
He saw something that needed to be done, something he could help with, and he just went ahead and did it. He helped out MS, even though we all hate them. (joke, geez!) He's been civil about the whole thing. And he's raising a big chunk of change -- which he'll give to charity.
He sounds like a cool guy.
Re:Would be amusing... (Score:2)
If it takes charity to feed 17% of a city, something is seriously fucked up, and handouts will never fix the problem.
Teach a man to fish, and all...
Re:Good for him (Score:2)
"Giving money to charity" = "a great man"
"Giving money to charity" = "a good man"
"Giving money to charity" = "the right thing to do"
The first two are never true. The last one is true only in some situations. Was he participating in this charity before Microsoft sent him a $500 check? Did he just bow to pressure from "the community" and give it all -- plus 4 times more -- to charity to gain approval somehow? Was this an opportunity to help along something he was already involved in?
Chaney? The benevolent brother of Markov? (Score:2)
No Smoking
No Spitting
-The MGMT
Re:Why bid on this? (Score:2)
You mean I just spent $2300 on a $500 check that I can't cash? Damn it!
I think the point here is the charity...the check itself is a novel excuse to give to a good cause.
Re:Worse are the trolls.. (Score:2)
I should hope not. While there is the odd zealot, the Linux community has grown up over the last year or so in terms of their dealings with the outside world.
I don't see how you can draw a parrellel to Linux and Microsoft about the money going somewhere, though, as it'd go to either the charity Mike chose, or a charity the highest bidder chose -- not Linux or a distribution maker. And if it did go to MS -- why? They're a big company, and they are very profitable. Why would they need money?
---
I didn't begrudge him the money (Score:2)
Re:Charity being supported;thoughts (Score:2)
Re:Proof of Character (Score:2)
Re:Microsoft matching and charity (Score:2)
However, Microsoft do only match donations of their employees up to $10000 a year.
They ofcourse make other donations..and then there's bill's personal donations.
On going PR stunt (Score:2)
Re:I hate to be suspicious, but... (Score:2)
If you review the links in one of the subthreads, you will find that he did make several comments. The one I remembered was, "I would ask that when they make out a check they consider how much revenue would have otherwise been lost had this been down for another day or two...". The articles that were linked had a bit more context that make him seem less greedy.
I'm not trying to make any unwarranted accusations. Frankly, I was hoping some ideas would be posted on verifying legitimacy. You have the benefit of knowing him. All I know is that he's some guy who has managed to keep his name in the press far longer than I would have expected, and that makes me suspicious of his motives.
If he's doing this all for charity, then more power to him. You have to admit that it's not exactly unknown for flakes to capitalize on a windfall of publicity.
---
Re:I hate to be suspicious, but... (Score:2)
Seriously, you can't believe that exposure doesn't lead to sales (and lack of exposure results in fewer sales). Just look at Coke.
When Coke advertises, they try and create a "lifestyle" around the product, so that when you see it in the supermarket or whatever, you identify with the product enough to buy it (note that Coke traditionally has not advertised on taste).
But what exposure does Linux gain from this? The average person is going to focus on the humorous fact that a normal individual paid the bill for giant Microsoft -- but The Advocacy is attuned to any news regarding Linux, so naturally you focus on that fact. There is zero positive press for Linux out of this.
Note, by the way, that the average person sees this as humorous, and does not carry any anger like The Advocacy would like.
If the story read (to use your example), "Michael, sipping on a Coke, described how he paid the bill for Microsoft", would you say that Coke would get a slew of new business? "Maude, that there Michael guy is a good joe! If he's a Coke drinker, then by God I'm gonna drink Coke, too!"
Maybe if the story was something like, "Michael used his Linux operating system to repair the Microsoft mail system" or something, there might be some slight tie-in, but the merits of Linux had nothing to do with the story.
---
Re:I hate to be suspicious, but... (Score:2)
I suppose some people might move from Hotmail over this, but it wasn't down long enough to really affect much. No one uses a free e-mail to get 100% uptime, and I even doubt it was down long enough to bounce received messages.
As for ads, unless they are at 100% ad space utilization (unlikely), the ads are simply made up at another time.
Finally, Linux got zero new users over this. People change platforms when there is a good reason (like some superior application), not when a particular advocate happens to pay a bill.
---
More follow up (Score:2)
Perhaps non-binding is not even the issue, but it's not easily verifiable. Why would he only want cashier's checks and not personal checks? All he has to do is wait for the check to clear.
---
Re:Tax deductible... (Score:2)
Re:It proves no such thing (Score:2)
Your comment, for example, was shitty, calculated to make that guy feel bad. But you failed, and you know what else? We forgive you!
We love you anyway, because we realize that you are weak. Even though you can't allow yourself to see the potentially grubby motivations behind superficial acts of charity like this doesn't mean that you are worthless.
It takes all kinds to make this little world of ours go 'round. Keep the faith, brother, and have a good cry on us!
Re:Which Charity? (Score:2)
Not that I like either, just schadenfreude, my desire to see no good deed go unpunished. I think I've watched too much Simpson's.
I would frame the check. (Score:2)
Munky_v2
Nothing Wrong with buying fame (Score:2)
Seems to me like he is buying fame, but anyone who complains about someone giving 2 grand away to a charity for purposes of achieving another few minutes in the spotlight isn't gauging the situation properly. He deserves a lot more praise than, say, a large corporation that shells out advertising bucks to hype a product that squashes a consumer market and fails to deliver on 95% (arbitrary number, yes?) of it's promises. I think everyone should buy a little fame this way. This man is an example to be emulated.
Re:Good for him (Score:2)
OK, following this wonderful logic of yours:
Bill Gates donated a great load of money to charity as well. I think it says great things about how generous Microsoft must be. Bollocks
The actions of one man cannot represent the actions of a community. The Linux community in particular are in general (with some exceptions) a group of Microsoft bashing self-righteous 'gurus' - something that this man, who is auctioning the check is clearing not.
He represents himself, he does not represent the Linux community by any stretch of the imagination.
Yep... (Score:2)
Re:Nothing Wrong with buying fame (Score:3)
Seems to me like he is buying fame, but anyone who complains about someone giving 2 grand away to a charity for purposes of achieving another few minutes in the spotlight isn't gauging the situation properly.
No shit.
Andover offers up millions to buy Slashdot, get press attention and make its IPO a lot more attractive. The Slashdot community responds with as much adoration, love and praise as it can muster.
This guy offers up $2,500 to help charity and possibly -- though by no means definitely -- get press attention for himself. The Slashdot community thinks he's a contemptible publicity whore.
Go figure.
Charity Hypocrisy (Score:3)
But Bill Gates gives billions of dollars to charity and it is a conspiracy/Bill Gates Sucks/Microsoft Sucks/etc etc..
Is there a bit of Hypocrisy in the slashdot crowd?
Re:Yeah, what's with the moderation (Score:3)
Abandoned property (Score:3)
A trademark is *not* an absolute IP right, it has to be defended. That's why they send out "cease and dissent" orders for trivial infringements, like the "Dummy's Guide to my roommate's most annoying habits." If the IP owner doesn't defend their rights, they become unenforceable.
A domain name can be defended by trademarks, of course, but the flip side is that a domain name is the most trivial thing to defend - the cost of an annual renewal is far less than the cost of consulting with your lawyer for an hour. If a company not only didn't pay the fee while the domain was "on hold," but actually let it slip entirely, a judge is unlikely to feel that they exercised due diligence in defending their IP property. It depends on how tightly the domain is tied to the company, of course, but I would not be surprised if domains with only loose connections ("passport" = Microsoft?) be declared legally abandoned and open to whoever paid the bill.
Proof of Character (Score:3)
----
Re:Good for him (Score:3)
Worse are the trolls.. (Score:3)
With the requisite shades. And, suprisingly, seems to have a high bid (might be a welcher).
But who would sink to this level? This is going to a charity, be it one to feed the homeless, one to help children, or one to help people being stepped on big corporations. Why should some troll be allowed to stomp all over this good will?
Using this for free adversiting or free trolling over Linux users (raising the bid price unfairly, too)..
It really says a lot about a person's moral fibre, that. It also really disgusts me.
---
Makes You Think (Score:3)
I have heard suggesting that this kind of thing is common accros lots of companys, I wonder how many valuable domains will be lost over the next few years attributable to sloth from the bean counters. This guy proberbly done the right thing in using the whole thing to get quite a bit of publicity for himself, I however might have been tempted to nab the url for myself after it had been 'reposesed'.
People talk about the value of generic domain names before they have been used, but what of the value of a domain name like hotmail after it has become so popular. Makes you wonder how much Microsoft would have been prepaired to pay to get it back. I know there are rules against domain sitting that allow a company to claim a domain name they have a trademark in relation to, but would this stand up in court if the name had been lost due to non payment?
Good for him (Score:3)
Now he has gone the other route and will be donating money to charity. Good for him. I think it says great things about the Linux community.
Talk about a sense of civic responsibility! (Score:3)
Re:Would be amusing... (Score:3)
Charity being supported;thoughts (Score:4)
This isn't going to happen in the future... (Score:4)
charity (Score:4)
But seriously--what a cool guy--
/will
Howza, Howza, getcher Microsoft checks here! (Score:4)
Seeing as people are paying thousands of dollars for a $500 check, I thought I'd take this opportunity to offer for sale not one, but two (!) checks from Microsoft to me. Check one is a $20 rebate check for Microsoft Encarta, and check two is a $100 rebate check for a Xircom 56K modem.
Bidding starts at $120, so lets see those offers fly! Papa needs a new pair of shoes!
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
/. ups my bid! (Score:4)
ZDNet bids item with pro-linux description
Posted by Roblimo [andover.net] on 04:15 AM April 1st, 2000
ZDNet Employee [zdnet.com] writes "ZDNet's CEO is auctioning his old Porche for a new Ferrari. The good thing is that the Porche comes with a Redhat 5.1 CD in the back on the trunk. All proceeds go to the CEO and his girlfriend." It's worth $11,342,251 as we speak. Can I bid with my inflated Andover/RedHat stocks?
Tax deductible... (Score:4)
If the bid went as high as $6000, then the contribution would be $8500 - worth *over* $2500 as a deduction, and he'd actually be ahead!
Anyway, just pointing this out for fun. The charity wins whatever the amount, so it's definitely a cool thing to do.
Would be amusing... (Score:4)
From the link on EBay:
Nashville's Table, formed in '89 largely through the efforts of Phil Bredesen, a healthcare executive who later was elected mayor of Nashville, collects excess prepared and perishable foods from groceries, restaurants, and caterers and distributes it to agencies that serve hungry, needy, and homeless people. Since then, Nashville's Table has collected and distributed more than 2 million pounds of food--at no cost to either the donors or the recipient agencies. Nashville's Table relies on funding by donations from individuals, corporations, churches, and foundations. Currently, Nashville's Table works with about 175 donor groceries and restaurants, but the addition of two trucks to its fleet doubled its capacity. The not-for-profit organization says that 17 percent of the population of Nashville can be labeled hungry or threatened by hunger, while 20 percent of all prepared and perishable food in Nashville ultimately gest wasted.--Bill Hobbs
I hate to be suspicious, but... (Score:4)
We have no guarantees that this is really going to go to charity, and as far as I know, his promise is non-binding (real lawyers correct me if I'm wrong).
The reason I'm suspicious is his original quotes saying that he felt he deserved a large sum of money from Microsoft, based how much theoretical money was "lost" (which, of course, was really zero).
Call me cynical, but based on his past behavior I think a grain of salt is prescribed here.
---
Re:Ebay Link (Score:4)
You should have capitalized the N in Nazis.
kwsNI
Ebay Link (Score:5)
Gentlemen (and women) start your bidding.
--
Re:Now he's just being silly (Score:5)
I mean, I see your point, he's just doing this for good press (I'm not agreeing, just seeing). But honestly, if you can get someone to do a good deed just for some (free) good press, thats great! More good deeds will happen, and the world will be a better place.
Why does a good deed become bad just because it will get you covered in the media? This guy is giving $2500 of his own money to charity not to mention spending some of his time to raise yet more money for charity. HE'S USING HIS GOOD PRESS TO RAISE MONEY FOR CHARITY! I think it is in remarkably poor taste to critize someone who is doing their best to get as much money as possible to a food bank. Sure, he gets his name in print, but in 3 weeks who will remember it? By your logic, Mother Theresa was extremly petty. I mean, her whole life she just kept trying to make headlines by helping people.
In short, I have a greal of respect for this man for donating his time and money to charity and very litte for you for critisizing him.
--Nick
Re:I hate to be suspicious, but... (Score:5)
I was actually surprised it took that long for 1 of us to pay it because several people (myself included) went to the NSI payment site [networksolutions.com] to verify if it was down but for hours nobody paid it until Micheal Chaney did. Upon reflection it seems very telling upon the character of slashdot readers (during Christmas) that it took that long for one of us to pay it...(it's not like we suspected MSFT wouldn't reimburse the check).
Here's the offending ZDNet [zdnet.com] and C|Net [cnet.com] articles that made everyone start calling him a money hungry opportunist.
Quotes...
ZDNet : Microsoft said it would refund Chaney the $35, although Chaney hinted his bailout of the world's biggest software company was worth more. "Microsoft is under no legal obligation to repay the $35 to me, and it doesn't really matter to me if they do or not. If they do
C|Net: As for Microsoft's promised check, Chaney said he plans to frame it. "I'm not going to cash it," he said, "unless it's a huge amount." Pointing out the value of restoring service to millions of Microsoft customers and the preservation of advertising revenues, Chaney suggested that his Christmas charity is arguably worth more than a simple thanks. "In a perfect world, I wish they'd take that into account," he said. "But I'm not relying on it. It's their choice."
What he claimed is that he felt what he did was worth more than a $35 check and a thank you.