CraigsList lets readers post explicitly racist, homophobic and otherwise disgusting ads for housing. It does nothing to stop these posts. And the court just ruled that CraigsList has no legal obligation to stop any outright discrimination.

I understand why there can’t be a legal obligation to prevent these posts. Such a law would significantly curtail social networking’s recent explosion and probably bankrupt a few new business models.

But isn’t there a moral obligation? I’d quickly say yes if it weren’t for the nonexistent backlash from outraged users.

Perhaps users appreciate CraigsList helping them avoid replying to a crazed, racist person’s ad for “roommate wanted.”

What I do know is that if a newspaper ever printed those same CraigsList ads, the paper would field angry phone calls all day long. Much lower expectations for CraigsList.

Users seem to understand that CraigsList is an involuntary messenger for all types of people, racist and otherwise. They don’t blame the messenger because of an assumption that CraigsList isn’t capable of weeding out the bad stuff.

In his initial response to the lawsuit, CEO Jim Buckmaster took a surprising approach, belittling the complaints and praising CraigsList as a fountain of equality. He praised the flagging system and a link to housing rules that they call an “education” program.

Would have been nice if Buckmaster acknowledged that no system is perfect and that they’re working to make their’s better.

I hope that despite not being diplomatic, CraigsList is actually working on improvements.