Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
But that's the point isn't it? We're not talking about forcing someone to provide something they don't want to. We're talking about the morality of the freely made choice. You can say it is a bad choice for Amazon while acknowledging other outlets exist. It's not exclusive.
Exactly this. It's absolutely Amazon's choice to carry the book or not. They should not be forced to do so, that in itself would be immoral. But the way in which they're going about their lack of support appears opaque and underhanded.
“But the way in which they're going about their lack of support appears opaque and underhanded.” How so? They are simply choosing not to sell this particular product; much like many products that choose not to sell. The whys are really irrelevant.
It would be helpful to potential sellers for their guidelines to be well-documented and available for anyone to read. Otherwise I will stand by my statement that it's opaque and a bit underhanded.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
