Because your use case might be different than what your company targets? I see no problem with that, heck, if the person used cloudflare and only cloudflare, I would probably question if they are making proper desicions of benefits of diffirent products, and if they are drinking company kool-aid.

I would rather read content generated by someone who is able to compare and contrast various technologies in an objective fashion, instead of a yes man.

Rustam does whatever he likes with his own domain(s). I do use Cloudflare for jgc.org but not for every domain that I own. Shrug.

There is no "general rule"; stop trying to make it seem like there is.

Additionally, many companies learned the hard way that forcing an employee to use your products or services over those they want to use will do nothing but lower morale and cause frustration. Let people use what they want and already are using and they'll be much happier because they don't feel stifled by their employer. That's why most companies have a BYOD policy for things like phones, because nobody wants to switch if they don't have to.

Finally, it's frankly none of your business what products a person, any person chooses to use for their own personal projects. That's their decision to make, not yours, and they don't have to justify it to anyone but themselves.

Meh. I'm not the guy you're replying to, and I think he is introducing a bit of an 'issue' where there really isn't one. However, I think it brings up an interesting topic/observation about Cloudflare.

There certainly is a stigma in many companies that employees should use their employers products. I used to do work at some major beverage manufacturers, and for example, carrying a can of Coke into a Pepsi office will literally have you escorted out of the building. For lunch, Pepsi employees are heavily discouraged from eating at places that serve Dr Pepper or Coke products. Company money absolutely cannot be spent on buying catering/services from caterers that don't have Pepsi, etc. For airlines, I have a friend that works at United and he has said multiple times about how he hopes his colleagues never find out that he flies American sometimes because it's cheaper when flying to his hometown.

More recently and relatable to this forum, there was a post a week or two ago where a GitLab employee got lambasted by the CEO for using Github for his personal projects rather than GL.

If anything, I think this is an interesting observation that Cloudflare might have 'less of a stick up its butt' in terms of policing what its employees do. Is this thread the right place for that discussion? Idk, but it's an interesting discussion nonetheless.

The only reason I can see for wanting an employee to have a site on Cloudflare is so that they get personal experience of using Cloudflare _as a user_. That's very valuable and the primary reason I have jgc.org on Cloudflare: so I get to try every new Cloudflare product.

I actually pay for Cloudflare out of my own pocket like a normal user so I see every wart and new product etc.

You feel that way because it does not move the needle for someone to use your own product on such a small scale. Now let's say that same employee was socializing or coming in contact in some way with a decision maker for a potential large customer (or a current large customer). In that case you wouldn't feel the same way. And if you did feel the same way that wouldn't make much business sense because you know business and making a profit is important to most companies or should be. So sure it's easy to take that attitude because you think it doesn't matter (in this case) or because you aren't considering the very general sense of what it might mean to others.

It's is well known that companies go to great lengths for various reasons to encourage their employees to not only use their own products but to discount those products for an employee. As far as you paying for Cloudflare so you can see the end to end experience that's fine and that makes sense. However Cloudflare should consider reimbursing the nominal amount that you are paying. Further they should consider (Apple and Adobe did this as well as auto manufacturers) giving discounts to 'friends and family' because it's a decent source of feedback on the product. You know what else it does? It encourages friends and family to support the person continuing working for the company (because it's in their best interest because they get a benefit). I know of someone personally whose brother is high up at a well know auto manufacturer and the brother gets a car literally at no cost just to be an ambassador and encourage other sales at that company (and it works I have looked into buying the car as a result as have others).

Also noting that Cloudflare is an internet company for which the competitive landscape and ability to have losses is vastly different than an airline or a beverage manufacturer. There is a reason that old school companies are like that. And to think it's wrong in some way does not consider the situation that they are dealing with trying to keep market share in a business with very thin margins.

No the 'general rule' is that in certain situations you do something not to appear to be disrespectful in some way. So for example if you were to work at Ycombinator the 'general rule' would be to try and encourage others to use yc instead of someone who competes with YC. Ditto if you work for a department store it would be typical to be supportive in some way for your employer (who gives you a job) and not if you can afford to shop at one of their competitors. For some reason this has been lost in the new economy.