Morality in Social Media Squatting

Joseph

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2015
Posts
479
Reacts
0
Reputation
0
Credits
0
What do you guys believe the deal is as for social media squatters?

I feel that what they do, if it is conscious, is completely and utterly immoral and should be ruled out on every social media. If a social media is being squatted or is inactive for a certain period of time then I believe that the social network should inform the rightful owner (the squatter) that if they don't start bringing activity up then their account will be unclaimed or closed. If they see suspicious activity on the account such as tweeting after the email is sent and then going inactive then they should free up the account without another warning.

I just feel that many other people could put inactive usernames to good use and it is just selfish that people hold on to names (doing zilch with them) for financial gain.
 
everyone here would lose a lot of funding lol

besides half of phillys traffic is from the og marketplace so rip forumkorner
 
Slay said:
did you just make a morality thread based on social media hoarding?
Click to expand...

gunnar said:
do you know how many people on this site would lose money
Click to expand...

Villain said:
everyone here would lose a lot of funding lol

besides half of phillys traffic is from the og marketplace so rip forumkorner
Click to expand...

Not on social media hoarding, on squatting. I am talking those random Chinese people who claimed and went inactive, or random people who took names and just sit on them without keeping it in use
 
Joseph said:
Not on social media hoarding, on squatting. I am talking those random Chinese people who claimed and went inactive, or random people who took names and just sit on them without keeping it in use
Click to expand...

People should be able to "hoard" as much as they want, if you buy/acquire an SM its yours & no one can tell you what you can or cant do with it.

If you bought 50 nice cars in real life do I have a right to tell you no that's too many cars give me one? No.

It's a different story with people making an account and going inactive though, I agree with you that something needs to be put in place for accounts that are clearly never going to be active again.

Something like 3 years of 0 activity = handle is able to be claimed. Similar to what sound cloud has in place but 6 months is too short imo.
 

Yeah I mean, as I said, I am not really talking about "hoarding".
People can do that if they wish, I just think that inactive accounts are dumb.
 
You never own the account anyway the rights are owned by the company hence the reason your Xbox account gets banned when Microsoft finds out you've sold it
 
RS4 said:
You never own the account anyway the rights are owned by the company hence the reason your Xbox account gets banned when Microsoft finds out you've sold it
Click to expand...

What are you talking about?
I am talking about opinions on people who keep accounts but leave them inactive.
 
Joseph said:
Not on social media hoarding, on squatting. I am talking those random Chinese people who claimed and went inactive, or random people who took names and just sit on them without keeping it in use
Click to expand...
that's literally what we do 90% of the time
 
Joseph said:
What are you talking about?
I am talking about opinions on people who keep accounts but leave them inactive.
Click to expand...
you said if you buy or acquire an account you can do what you want with it because its yours but in theory its not yours so you cant, but I know what your sayin and its what everyone does here, if there's a new email service etc then everyone will create as many ogs as they can and sit on them and sell them at a later date.
 
Sorry I have real immoral shit to worry about. The internet is a game.
 
Are people really that upset that we don't use some accounts? A lot of the other "squatters" I met aren't really squating they just haven't gotten the time to put their project together. Imho it's no ones business what those people do with their accounts, because they are THEIR accounts. There is a business for owning good handles just like owning good domains, if the social media services started just giving them to random people vs only giving them to publishers like they do now then you'd see all these powerful, brandable mediums being used by everday people...imagine if you went to google.com and it was just some random guys tweets...you'd be pissed right? Imagine going to cars.com and seeing someone talk about their child. I feel these handles should ONLY be reserved for publishers, I see way to many high value and powerful handles being used by random people who will never put it to good use.
 
I always tend to squat on my usernames, usually I'm just gonna resell them though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…