Subject: comments on run-adverts-01

From: April Marine <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 16:08:35 -0700

Hello Ted and all....

Great job!  What a lot of work you've done!  I have a few comments (of course).

First, I would vote to put your name up there with the current authors
as you've really done a lot of work to rescue the doc.  That's just an
opinion, not a directive from the AD; y'all can fight it out. :-)

Second, before you put this out as an official ID, make sure to check
out the 1ID-guidelines info as I note below, as you've got to put the
newest boilerplate in it or it will be rejected.

Other than that, a few things, mostly nits.  My comments are preceded
by >s.  I go through the doc and all the sections I pull out to
comment on are in order relative to each other.  But let me know if
this is too confusing.

Again, thanks for the draft!
April
p.s. I haven't actually checked MY input for typos...
-----------------------------------------------------

                    $$$$$  MAKE ENEMIES FAST  $$$$$
                                   or
            How to Advertise Responsibly Using the Internet

>This sounds like advertising responsibly is a way to make enemies.
>Subtitle and title have to be on the same wavelength; these
>contradict each other.  It should probably be something like "Don't
>Make Enemies Fast: or How...." or "Make Enemies Fast: Internet
>Advertising Pitfalls and Tips to Avoid Them"

Abstract

   The Internet is not a free resource. Access and a presence on
   the 'Net comes at a cost to the participants, the service provider,
   or the recipients of those services made available by the Internet.

>I'd prefer "net" to "'Net" but can be dissuaded.
> should the "or the recipients" be "and the recipients"?

  ... there are
   groups and individuals who choose to use the 'Net for purposes for
   which it was not intended, defying consensus among the practitioners
   and the unwilling recipients.

>"practitioners" of what?  maybe "defying consensus of the Internet community"?

Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet Draft.  Internet Drafts are working
   documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its Areas,

>use relatively new ID template instead.  It starts with a choice of wording, such as:

>>All Internet-Drafts must begin with ONE of the following three
>>statements:
>>
>>        This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance
>>        with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

>I only included the first statement because I think it is the one
>that applies.  These are in the "Guidelines to ID Authors" on the IETF
>web.

1. Introduction

...
   Nor are all experienced, long-term (predating the latest "fads",
   technology, and "browser" application software) Netizens against

>I find this parenthetical statement confusing.  I would delete it
>because even if we said something like "meaning those who pre-date the
>latest "fads", technology, etc." that is not very specific as a
>timeline.  You could say "meaing those who pre-date the web" but you
>might was well leave it out, imo.

   to RFC-2635, Section 2). To understand why such activities are

> this should be in the References

   not, by it's mere existence, engender predetermined opposition,

> "it's" --> "its"

   It is a fundamental tenet to any Internet presence that a party
   will be responsible for their Internet "image"; the persona that
   they create.

>   will be responsible for their Internet "image," the persona that
> would change semi-colon to comma and reverse position with quote
> because "the persona that they create" is not a full clause

   methods used to sell products in the traditional sales channels;
   language, image, relationships, eye contact or body language;
   no longer apply when measuring an Internet sale. Reputation,

> would change semi-colons to dashes to maintain relationship of subject to verb:
>   methods used to sell products in the traditional sales channels--
>  language, image, relationships, eye contact or body language--
>   no longer apply when measuring an Internet sale. Reputation,

        -   In some countries, such material is a crime to view
            posses or distribute ("trafficking"). As the website

> "posses" --> "possess"

   "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog.[2]" Advertisers will

> not sure we really  need to provide the reference twice

            Unsolicited E-Mail ("spam").

> this term is almost always referred to this way.  I don't think we
>need both every time.  I would just go for one and use it throughout,
>except the first time explain all the various terms people use for
>this stuff (as is done in the paper)

   MUST inform the person that data is being collected. In addition,

>I would avoid too much use of MUSTs in all caps as it confuses the
>IESG with language in standards track docs, as per RFC 2119.  Just lowercase it.

   or other tangible or intangible item. And, or course, the advertiser
   needs to get the work out to the market - quickly. After all, neither

> ...And, of course....needs to get the word out....
> (two typos)

   advertise the product, they must first determine to WHOM the product
   will be advertised to.

> they must first decide to whom the product will be advertised.  (no final "to")

   While there are too numerous to mention, this document concerns
   itself with only those that apply to the ethical use of Internet

> "while these are ... concerns itself only with those..."
> type and change order of wording

   Note that the any manner of broadcast (distribution-based)

> Note that any...
> remove "that the any"

             There is also concern about grabbing dynamic information
             via persistent state information;

> I think this needs to be expanded a bit.  Too jargony the way it is.

   C.   Netnews (usenet) and E-Mailing list group postings
...

             -   ask the group by posting a message with specific
                 information as to the type of product and the manner
                 in which you intend to advertise it

                 or

             -   read the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) to determine
                 what is specifically permitted or prohibited on that
                 particular group.

> I would put the FAQ point first.

> Also, that first one re posting a msg regarding your product with
>specific information: that could almost be spam itself, couldn't it?
>Sending a msg saying, "I have a product with X, Y, Z features that
>only costs $1234 that I really think this list would be interested
>in.  Is it appropriate to tell you about it?" is effectively telling
>them about it.

        It bears repeating at this point: Let the Seller Beware. The
        material discussed in Section 4 of this document are
        particularly relevant in the consideration of E-mail, and

> The material...is particularly relevant

        Given these conditions, all evidence point to the fact that

> all evidence points

   advertiser operates their own website or web page, they already
   posses the most important facet, a web presence with which to

> "posses" to "possess"

      language indicating so. Furthermore, persons submitting data
      MUST be given the choice to "Opt-Out"; that is, to choose to

> you might get away with ONE "must" capitalized, but careful

   product/service. But keep it to 4 lines total (four lines is the
   maximum accepted length for signatures).

> I would change "accepted" to "recommended"

   will find people of a similar interest there and many potential
   customers. So long as an advertiser isn't an offensive in

> delete "an"; "advertiser isn't offensive"

   DO tell people how list data has been gathered.  If recipients
   are signed up from a web page, make sure they know the prospective
   recipient is aware that they will be getting mail. Many web pages

> delete "the prospective recipient is aware" or delete "they know"

   DO respect the privacy of customers. Keep a mailing list private.
   For an advertiser to sell a mailing list is not responsible or
   ethical. In addition, if offering any type of online transactions,
   advertisers should take care to encrypt any sensitive information
   being taken from customers, such as Credit Card or other Payment
   information.

> Also, something like "Provide customers with information about how
> their sensitive information is protected." (more than "protect it"
> or "protect it via encryption")

   DO let people know what purpose any data is being collected for.

> DO let people know for what purpose any data is being collected.

   postage for more than their cost. Early "investors" in this scheme
   did get their promised return on investment, but with money that
   later investors were investors. Ponzi was actually doing nothing

> ...later investors were investing....

   paying latter investors money to earlier investors.

> paying latter investors' money to ....

   Like early pyramid participants, who "earn" money from the later
   participants.

> not a sentence.  Maybe "This is very like early pyramid participants..."

   Just as pyramids always collapse, Ponzi schemes always collapse
   also; when the new people and new money run out.  This can have

> change semi-colon to comma (final "when" clause is dependant, not independant)

   If it says participants can make money "fast," "easy" or

> "it" is a bit vague.  Maybe "If the deal says" or "if the proposal says"?

   choice of legislators, commercial websites, and Internet aficionados.

> I think that's "afficionados"

   [2] ibid

> I wouldn't use this, but you can leave it in and let the RFC Editor
>have at it.  Actually, I think I had the comment to delete the second
>citation anyway.