🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@mur2501 feed him cat food, if you lack that some unspiced ground meat, chicken, beef, whatever works great in a pinch. Remember cats dont do well with veggies and carbs so unlike with dogs (where youd add some rice) I wouldnt do that for a cat.

@thenewoil

I'm not sure i see it as a paradox because in both cases I am encouraging people to place ethics first, and customer demand second.

@koherecoWatchdog @realcaseyrollins

@koherecoWatchdog

You can effect laws without voting rights.. refuse to buy anything from the country until they ban shark finning, if enough people do that it would put pressure on them changing their laws.

You can also seek to ban the import of shark fins in your local country, which will go a long way to reducing it.

@thenewoil @realcaseyrollins

@koherecoWatchdog

> this presumes complete alignment with law and ethics

No it doesnt. What it does presume (as I already pointed out) is that when the law and ethics are not in alignment the correct way to address that is by putting pressure on governments to change their laws, not by requiring FedEx to take the roll of a government and legal system by determining for themselves what they will deem appropriate or not.

@thenewoil @realcaseyrollins

@thenewoil

Depends, much as with the other issue there is the ethical side, and there is the popular demand side.

In my view it would be unethical for fedex to inspect contents of packages outside of legal obligations.

On the other hand the general population might demand Fedex inspect such packages and reject shark fin packages, therefore showing demand for them to do something unethical.

In the other case we were talking about providing a service of overnight shipping, which I wouldnt say is a huge ethical issue.

@koherecoWatchdog @realcaseyrollins

@koherecoWatchdog

Sure, I agree. But FedEx are not the ones doing wrong in my view. In fact to ban shipping items that are otherwise legal to ship would be fedex engaging in wrong doing in my view...

So yea by all means boycott shark fins, ill support you, but do it where you should be, at the consumer level and at the government level. Its not the place of a package shipper to do that sort of level of investigation or enforcement.

@thenewoil @realcaseyrollins

@koherecoWatchdog

No I am implying that it **should** be illegal, and enforced. It is not FedEx's place to create their own set of "laws" they enforce seperate from the countries being shipped from. If its legal to hunt shark fins in a country then fedex should be ok shipping it.. if we feel sharkfins should be protected (and I would support that) you should be fighting for that at the governement level not fedex.

@realcaseyrollins @thenewoil

@koherecoWatchdog

The onus in that case is on the 3rd world country to step up and make it illegal, not on FedEx, thats not their purview nor should it be.

@realcaseyrollins @thenewoil

@koherecoWatchdog

No, I envision that any enforcement would come down to the local government. Yes they will fail to enforce it sometime and stuff will get through, but that is no excuse to violate what I view as privacy rights.

That said a blanked ban on all trophy hunting is itself counter productive. While we obviously want to eliminate poaching of animals illegally there is legal trophy hunting which is ultimately beneficial to the species. Distinguishing between the two would not be practical for any shipping company and indeed that is what we see where companies that have banned shipping of animals as the result of a trophy hunt do so blindly to the nuance (whether it was actual poaching or not).

@thenewoil @realcaseyrollins

@BlinkRape

Ok

@realcaseyrollins @koherecoWatchdog @thenewoil

@thenewoil

Yes I use UPS not fedex for the same reason. Thankfully UPS is pretty decent.

@koherecoWatchdog @realcaseyrollins

@koherecoWatchdog

While I am against trophy hunting I also dont feel that is the place or the right of the shipping company to get involved in. In fact in my view there should be legal protection and privacy over the content of my package.

@realcaseyrollins @thenewoil

@thenewoil

Well when we talk about things negatively impacting my life, at least things I am made aware of, amazon has generally done a better job than many mom and pop stores. At least when it comes to online shopping (the in person expiernce i think is where mom and pop stores can shine sometimes).

I cant tell you how many times i ordered something from a mom and pop sized store and they didnt check their emails for a week before i even found out they had to cancel my order. A lot of times this has caused some serious repercussions for me as delays in my orders often result in delays in my projects.

So if we are really going to talk about fallout from my decision to use Amazon I'd say the fallout i expiernced from dealing with smaller shops over the years is pretty much which drove me to amazon in the first place. Way less hassle, I get my stuff quick and on time, and very rarely do things just fall between the cracks.

@koherecoWatchdog @realcaseyrollins

@thenewoil

I dont buy things based on what I need... if that were the case i wouldnt be buying a game or fancy shirt in the first place I dont NEED those at all. I can wear a potato sack for a shit and it would meet my **needs**. But I do usually WANT it overnight, because i get excited and I dont enjoy waiting for something im excited about.. may not be a need, but it is what i want, and im the one with the money. Business is all about giving people what they want, if people want it overnight (which is clear they do) and you dont provide it, expect all the business to go to amazon (as it tends to).

@koherecoWatchdog @realcaseyrollins

@koherecoWatchdog

Not that im setting aside ethics, but only that i am not making any argument one way or the other about the ethics of amazon... I am explaining, however, why i buy from them, why i wont switch, and why getting me to switch, even if im convinced of the ethics, would first require mom and pop stores from doing their part and offering replacement services.

@realcaseyrollins @thenewoil

@thenewoil

Thats fair, making an ethical argument for why you should pay extra for a mom & pop is legit. My problem is that mom & pops arent doing their part, they arent offering services that can replace amazon in the first place, even at an extra charge. So the ethical argument isnt enough IMO.

The vast majority of my decision as to where to buy something is based on if i can get overnight delivery at or close to the base cost for the shipping (no huge handling fees)... I very rarely find mom and pop stores that will ship overnight at any cost. In fact they seem to be a bit lazy about it and your looking at atleast a week most of the time.

@koherecoWatchdog @realcaseyrollins

@realcaseyrollins

If your willing to go used (and a lot of times thats the smart choice) ebay is the way to go.

I prefer most of my tech new, so I go through amazon. But I also collect a lot of ancient artifacts (mostly stuff that is pre-1800, stuff like books, coins, some gemstones). So I do get a lot of my stuff from ebay too, but thats mostly just stuff i cant get on amazon because you cant get it new.

@koherecoWatchdog @thenewoil

@thenewoil

If large companies can legitimately offer better services for cheaper, then so be it. To me thats just an argument that we should have lots of big companies.

That said i disagree with the premise. I never said that other companies had to be as cheap as amazon, only offer the same services. They can certainly offer things like overnight shipping and generous refund policies, it just means they will have to charge a bit more to offer that. I'd happily pay a little extra to use a mom & pop store that offered amazon-like services. But they generally dont offer those services, and again, not because they can, they could always charge for it.

@koherecoWatchdog @realcaseyrollins