> I do not see any bad event in wikipedia

There is a "Controversies" section of their Wikipedia article with 8 distinct sub-headings, and the section is prefixed with "For a more comprehensive list, see List of controversies involving GoDaddy" linking to another dedicated 15-section article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoDaddy#Controversies

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involvin...

thanks, I did missed that

(must say I do not see anything I consider that bad, imho)

That's because they maintain their corporate identity vigorous and do their best to wipe anything bad.

Really bad security. They still enable broken ciphers like RC4 via ssh on their shared-hosting web servers. BTW - these servers use CPanel, which runs on CentOS 6 (or a derivative), which is EOL. If your company uses any security scanner, it will flag a lot on GoDaddy.

All the cool kids on HN hate GoDaddy. When prompted to elaborate the usual answer is "cuz they suck" or "I don't like their CEO". I first used GoDaddy about a decade ago, and thought nothing of it. I guess some people just like to hate. (or is it cancel nowadays?)

Educate yourself: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involv...

Ah, I missed that, thanks.

anyhow, imho, I do not see anything that I consider that bad; they are sure selling products that anybody involved in IT may consider at "low level", so avoiding it. I have the same reaction anytime I hear the term "Wordpress", but no doubt is used by so many.