Craiglook.com has been shut down by demand of Craigslist.org

I have to chime in with my disgust as well. Craigslist has settled into a happy little rut where they do little if anything to improve their product (Hmmm, that wouldn't have anything to do with ebay not wanting better competition, would it?). So Craigslook comes along and improves Craigslist from without - and they get slapped down for it.

Think about it. Craigslist has 30 employees. 30! Unless I'm missing something, they are making crazy amounts of money. Do you want to see some sickening PR speak? Go to Craigslist's FAQ page. They try very hard to make it sound like they're this benevolent entity that barely breaks even:

Q: Why does craigslist still use a .ORG domain? A: It symbolizes the relatively uncommercial nature of craigslist, as well as our service mission and non-corporate culture.

Q: Why doesn't craigslist focus more on generating revenue? A: We rely on local communities to suggest ways to make money without compromising craigslist.

Excuse me while I puke. I place help-wanted ads in CL each year, and till now have been happy with those guys. Well f----'em. My next ad goes back to the local paper.

Boo hoo. What's with you guys? Now we have to work a little harder to find a deal. Don't like it? Don't use it. Hey, there's always E-Bay. And that's always easy, scam-proof, with 100% satisfaction. Jesus Christ!

Curious-

If everything they offer is free, where does their $100MM income come from??

It's about hypocrisy.

We rely on local communities to suggest ways to make money without compromising craigslist.

They're making it sound like they run bake sales to stay afloat. In fact, They are one of the most profitable companies out there. Kudos to them for being profitable. That's no vice. But if they were as benevolent and community oriented as they profess to be, they would do more in the way of continuous improvement. But no, that appears not to be a priority, and the e-bay connection is pretty glaring. I'd stop short of saying its monopolistic, but the thought has crossed my mind.

In reply to SVreX:

Help wanted and real estate ads.

http://www.craigslist.org/about/help/posting_fees

SVreX wrote: Apparently, Ebay is a 25% shareholder, though not the largest share (since they have sued Craigslist for protection of their investment). Interesting...

If I recall correctly, Ebay bought their share from one of the first Craigslist employees after they quit and it was not a welcome buy in. It started out as and remains an adversarial relationship...

I searched Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craigslist

"On August 13, 2004, Newmark announced on his blog that auction giant eBay had purchased a 25% stake in the company from a former principal. Some fans of Craigslist have expressed concern that this development will affect the site's longtime non-commercial nature, but it remains to be seen what ramifications the change will actually have. As of September 2010, there have been no substantive changes to the usefulness or non-advertising nature of the site—no banner ads, charges for a few services provided to businesses)."

This Ebay buy-in happened when I lived in San Francisco and there was an article in one of the weekly local rags describing the hurt feeling and sword rattling between Craig Newmark, the former principal, and Ebay. Ebay would turn Craiglist into a multi billion dollar company in a week if they had the managerial power. Craigslist, as flawed as it is, has wildly under-leveraged and underutilized users and user data by design. And the few owners (including Ebay), and analyst all know it. Craig Newmark really did see the scummy sex industry ads as a freedom of speech or cultural freedom Issue. If he wanted to be a billionaire he could- in literally as long as it took for the lawyers to send the paper back and forth. He wants to keep Craigslist as a dispersed local bulletin board for very real personal reasons- however stupid or altruistic or arrogant. I do not care one way or another.

SVreX: "I am asking for suggestions of other options. I am not hearing any. Only the implied suggestion that I've not got the right to ask for something better."

"Advanced search" on Google works pretty well for me. It's on the splash page to the right of the search field. Type in what you are looking for and put "craigslist.org" in the field thats asks where you want to look for it.

I like Craigslist the way it is, too. It's simple. It's text based. What other websites can boast that?

Hell, even Google is all hyper-funky now and sucks.

Derick Freese wrote: In reply to SVreX: Help wanted and real estate ads. http://www.craigslist.org/about/help/posting_fees

WOW!

Look closer- It's not help wanted and real estate ads.

It's BROKERED real estate ads in ONE city, help wanted in eleven cities, and then a $10 fee for a category called "Therapeutic Services". What the heck is that?? I looked at 2 pages worth of ads under this category in the Atlanta Craigslist. EVERY SINGLE ONE of them was for massage services.

There were 70 ads placed today. It's a Sunday. Probably not the best day for such services.

But, if 70 was the average, that's $700 per day. $4900 per week PER CITY. OK, ATL is a big market.

Looks to me like a $100MM prostitution ring.

I thought the "prostitution" issue was the personal section with people placing inappropriate ads on their own (indirectly or tacitly approved by CL). I see now that the more significant section is "Therapeutic Services", and that it is completely sanctioned DIRECTLY by CL, and their primary income source.

Altruistic my a$$.

Astounding.

Selling's legal, berkeleying's legal. Why isn't selling berkeleying legal?

Just sayin'.

Whatever two consenting adults want to do on their own time isn't any of my business. If someone can set up a web site that facilitates this transaction and make money on it, well, good for them.

While I am also a George Carlin fan, his logic is complete BS in this situation.

It's illegal.

They pose as a community service, claim to be a "foundation", operate under a "dot org", and fund their operations directly by running an illegal prostitution ring. Are they actually a non-profit? Do they dance through the tax code too?

This is not a situation where they have a "nice" system in place that some people are abusing and they are failing to police. They are directly funding their "community service" organization by charging call girls a fee to advertise their illegal wares. That's what pimps do. That's what the mafia does.

The debate of whether it SHOULD be legal or not is COMPLETELY irrelevant. It IS illegal.

If you'd like to suggest a change in that status, call your Congressman. As it stands, the warm fuzzy nice little community organization is running an illegal prostitution ring, and stomping on the necks of legitimate businesses who try to run an ancillary business. Identical business plan to the Gambinos .

In reply to SVreX:

From what I have heard from some of my less seedy than you may think acquaintances, the vast majority of escort services in the country are very very thinly veiled prostitution rings. The prostitution angle is technically illegal, but not very well enforced. Methinks those who want things that are technically illegal, but in practice commonplace, to be stopped should be the ones calling their congressmen. Craigslist: Highlighting Americas confused moral code.

The debate of whether it SHOULD be legal or not is COMPLETELY irrelevant. It IS illegal.

Do you SERIOUSLY think that is good logic!?!?!

Wow.

I'm guessing you're also pissed that the government spends your tax dollars to pay people to second guess laws? You know, people who consider constitutionality?

All those silly lawyers and judges are a bunch of anarchists!! What they call 'constitutionality concerns' is just one big cover-up for the fact that they have no respect for the LAW!

Datsun1500 wrote:

kreb wrote: They are one of the most profitable companies out there.

kreb wrote: , they would do more in the way of continuous improvement.

You do realize those 2 statements are foolish when you put them together? Most profitable, but needs improvement? Remember New Coke?

As motorheads we also should remember when American car companies were leading proponents of planned obselescence, and styling trumped technical advances 9 times out of ten. Again, I wouldn't mind so much if they were purely a corporation. I expect that stuff from GM, exxon, et cetera. But they go on about their "values" and how altruistic they are.

Meh, my outrage reserves are running low. It isn't as if anyone gives a E36 M3 anyway.

I guess you haven't been on a date in a while. Couple goes on a date, guy buys dinner, tickets to a movie, maybe even a bottle of wine. The couple retires to the bedroom and the exchange happens. Same thing.

I bet your local newspaper has personal ads. Same thing goes on there. How many people boycott the local newspaper because they have personal ads?

While the phone book might be almost obsolete, it too is chock full of personal ads.

Derick Freese wrote: I guess you haven't been on a date in a while. Couple goes on a date, guy buys dinner, tickets to a movie, maybe even a bottle of wine. The couple retires to the bedroom and the exchange happens. Same thing. I bet your local newspaper has personal ads. Same thing goes on there. How many people boycott the local newspaper because they have personal ads?

Interesting angle. Soooooooo............If she gets too clingy and refuses to leave the guy can just have her arrested for being a whore?

Mr. J, Vigo:

So clarify this for me...

Am I understanding that you think it is OK for CL to have it's primary source of income be call girl fees while they pose as an altruistic organization, and that you additionally think Conservative blowhards are somehow the bad guys in the situation because they are somehow more hypocritical than the rest of the world?

Is that what you said?? Are you sure?

And somehow I am the one who is challenged logically??

Wow.

Derick Freese wrote: I guess you haven't been on a date in a while. Couple goes on a date, guy buys dinner, tickets to a movie, maybe even a bottle of wine. The couple retires to the bedroom and the exchange happens. Same thing. I bet your local newspaper has personal ads. Same thing goes on there. How many people boycott the local newspaper because they have personal ads?

So all woman are whores, right?

Misogynistic crap.

Datsun1500 wrote:

SVreX wrote: As it stands, the warm fuzzy nice little community organization is running an illegal prostitution ring, and stomping on the necks of legitimate businesses who try to run an ancillary business. Identical business plan to the Gambinos .

See that is where you are wrong. The Gambinos cracked down on people who had a similar business. Craigslist is cracking down on people who attach themselves to their prostitution ring. Anyone else is more than welcome to start their own. Since you think Craigslist is running a ring, think of them as a Pimp. The other services are piggybacking on their ho's instead of getting their own. 1 ho can't have 2 pimps....

That's actually one of the more logical thing I've heard here...

I stand corrected.

My apologies. They are more OK because they are just pimps, not Gambinos.

SVreX wrote:

Derick Freese wrote: I guess you haven't been on a date in a while. Couple goes on a date, guy buys dinner, tickets to a movie, maybe even a bottle of wine. The couple retires to the bedroom and the exchange happens. Same thing. I bet your local newspaper has personal ads. Same thing goes on there. How many people boycott the local newspaper because they have personal ads?

So all woman are whores, right? Misogynistic crap.

We all peddle our wares trying to woo a mate. The logical flaw is in limiting "whore status" to only those who give up services for currency.

MrJoshua wrote:

SVreX wrote:

Derick Freese wrote: I guess you haven't been on a date in a while. Couple goes on a date, guy buys dinner, tickets to a movie, maybe even a bottle of wine. The couple retires to the bedroom and the exchange happens. Same thing. I bet your local newspaper has personal ads. Same thing goes on there. How many people boycott the local newspaper because they have personal ads?

So all woman are whores, right? Misogynistic crap.

We all peddle our wares trying to woo a mate. The logical flaw is in limiting "whore status" to only those who give up services for currency.

BTW: not limited to the just the female member of the party.

Is that the teaching you'd like to give to the guys who are gonna date your daughter?

I make no claims to honor in the decisions I made in my past related to women, but that doesn't mean it was right.

There is a higher plane. I know what nobility, honor, and good character are.

Not everyone "peddles their wares to woo a mate". I know a lot of people who are better than that. You are sadly mistaken.

And frankly, Derick, I had a date last night. I paid because I cherished her and wanted to show I care. I did NOT do it for sex, and had a lovely evening which didn't end in the sack (for which I have absolutely no regrets).

You should try it sometime.

holy moly! focus people, focus!

In reply to SVreX:

You are taking a higher moral stand for the sake of an argument. You are also refusing to judge anything based on any other definition but your own in this particular argument. In all relationship building activities we present ourselves to a potential date or mate or whatever you hope that person to be. We talk about ourselves and they talk about themselves. We evaluate each other on many levels and decide whether the other person is attractive enough to pursue a future relationship with. We absolutely do "peddle our wares to woo a mate". It may not be a defined "list of qualifications" placed on a placard for them to evaluate and bid upon and wares may not be based on sex for currency, but they are definitely presented and judged.
Derricks example was obviously based on the pre-relationship date. On your early dates, would you have pursued your wife if their was a guarantee of no sex ever? I doubt it. You presented yourself to her with the hope that she would accept you and eventually marry and have a family(sex) with you. Thankfully for both of you and all of us she accepted. The point is that we offer ourselves up to others in exchange to things we wish for them to give to us in every aspect our our lives. We played with the definition of whore to try to point out that there are shades of gray in all relationships and that defining "payment" only through currency is a flawed ideal. It basically started as jokes and went too far. Wow-craigslist is evil.