As Tara and Avri have pointed out, the recant is more PR than procedurally
substantive.  They're playing politics here, not changing policy, evidently.

For my part, I've never used them, but ever since Fyodor Vaskovich (Nmap,
insecure.com, seclists.org) had a very bad experience with an unwarranted
full-domain takedown back in 2007, I've distrusted them and periodically
they seem to run into additional thoughtlessness, reinforcing this
reputation rather than ameliorating it.

Their investment in edgy branding is all about a constructed image, not
related to function or policy -- designed to get attention (of customers
who don't know any better -- in terms of economic theory, their advertising
does nothing to reduce "information asymmetry" in the market), not to do
the right thing.  Different registrars are not basically all the same like
cola drinks, but GoDaddy is effectively encouraging consumers not to do due
diligence in choosing them ("nothing to see here, just move along ... hey,
look over there: a wardrobe malfunction").

My understanding is that they had a seat at the table in negotiating terms
of SOPA, and from the looks of it they mainly want to be "a player" rather
than specifically being responsive to customers.  My personal opinion is
that they are trying to play it both ways with conciliatory rhetoric
without really changing the substance of their position.  If they can
finesse a lot of customers back by saying "I'm sorry, trust me now" without
having to actually change their position in the policy-making process
itself, then their business stays intact and they can have their cake and
eat it too.

In short, they treat their customers like suckers (and in fact, like P.T.
Barnum, they seem to be aiming specifically for suckers as a marketing
strategy -- not that all of their customers actually *are* suckers, of
course, but the corporate attitude is pretty clear).

I would never consider using them, regardless of what they claim to say
about their positions on such policy matters.  Their brand in my book
remains the one they purchased from Fyodor this past summer in order to get
it off the radar: NoDaddy.

Dan


--
Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the author alone and do
not necessarily reflect any position of the author's employer.



At 11:34 AM -0500 12/25/11, Timothe Litt wrote:
>>> Seems like I good idea.  I'll move mine to tucows.
>
>I happen to use GODADDY, though I'm not a defender.  In fact, I don't like a
>lot of their policies nor am I sanguine about reports of how they have been
>enforced.  But they did support DNSSEC when my previous registrar did not
>(and still does not).
>
>I don't follow the logic of moving your business at this point.  They took
>an unacceptable position on SOPA; many customers punished them by taking
>their business elsewhere.  GD responded by dropping their advocacy for the
>unacceptable position.
>
>So now you (and according to web postings, others) still want to move more
>business elsewhere?  Others report receiving "please come back" calls, and
>responding "no".  Shouldn't you be finding a way to reward their change?
>
>Even if you want a stronger anti-SOPA position from them, it seems illogical
>to send the message that changing their position doesn't change their
>customers' behavior.
>
>If I were on the receiving end, I might decide that since changing my
>position didn't placate my customers, there's no point in listening to them.
>
>I think that if we want to be effective advocates, we need to be careful
>about how and when we protest.  Sometimes it can be hard to take "yes" for
>an answer...
>
>I'd encourage you to be clear about what more you want from GD if you pursue
>moving your business.  I'm not sure that reflexively going with the
>(protest) crowd is the right move.
>
>Of course, it's your call.  But that's my 3 cents.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------
>This communication may not represent my employer's views,
>if any, on the matters discussed.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Adam
>Peake
>Sent: Sunday, December 25, 2011 10:07
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] SOPA and GoDaddy
>
>GoDaddy supported SOPA and then it didn't, but:  "21,000 domains transfer
>out of Go Daddy in 1 day"
><http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57348183-93/21000-domains-transfer-out-of-
>go-daddy-in-1-day/>
>
>
>Seems like I good idea.  I'll move mine to tucows.
>
>Adam