Following The NYTimes’ NameMedia article, the technopinkos at slashdot got out of their holes again. Here’s few comments from that thread..
I think I speak of everyone, when I say: WTF
You just found out you missed on the biggest opportunity in the world? I thought so.
They really show Google ads on these pointless pages?
If I did that my adsense account would be terminated.
There’s no comparison between content pages to direct navigation. Direct navigation is as close as it gets to user’s intent.
At the end of the day all of us pay for the clutter created by domain names which exist only to capture page views. Presently to put a domain on line you just need to pay for registration and hosting on two DNS servers. The distributed nature of DNS takes care of the rest.
Should a way be found to make domain squatters pay the true cost of their collections?
Hey, I’d like to own all houses in my neighborhood as well but “At the end of the day all of us pay for the clutter created” by other property owners who are there just to occupy the property, some regularly, and some, as here in South Florida, a couple of months a year.
So now this kind of domain squatting has become respectable? Yeah right.
Better get some education before you keep talking. This is really an ignorant comment all around and besides making the writer look like a total fool it doesn’t say a thing.
There are a couple of positive comments here, one I really like..
>An obscure Web address may have four or so visitors a month
Dude, I need to invest in this.
Very rare on Slashdot’s domain discussions. Finally someone is thinking here!