fair@dual.UUCP (02/29/84)
I'm curious: How many USENET Contact people out there got a flyer in the
Snail mail for this? I wouldn't have noticed, except the address had the
phrase `Engineering Department System' in it, which I have put in exactly
one place... our USENET Compact Directory entry! (You know, the one
maintained by Karen Summers-Horton out of the goodness of her heart,
posted once a month, on the first of the month, in net.news.map).
Can the people at SSC confirm or deny that they have used the
USENET Compact Directory as a direct marketing mailing list?
Can the people at Teltone give us a hint about these `SSC' people?
a little irritated to see yet more junk Snail mail,
Erik E. Fair
dual!fair@BERKELEY.ARPA
{ihnp4,ucbvax,cbosgd,decwrl,amd70,fortune,zehntel}!dual!fair
Dual Systems Corporation, Berkeley, California
P.S. For the folks who are not USENET system administrators, can you
check to see that your admin is reading net.news.sa, please?
If they're not, please suggest that they do so, since that group
is intended to reach them all...mark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton) (02/29/84)
Personally, I get enough junk mail from lots of random sources that I never gave my permission to sell my name for, that I don't mind getting junk mail based on the Usenet directory. I do want to emphasize that the purpose of the Usenet directory is not for mailing lists, but so that we'll know (a) who is on the net, and (b) who to contact when something breaks. I've been trying to track down the sites that are generating rejection notices for net.announce the last few days, and about half of them are sites that not only run the old buggy software (even though the fix has been out for over 6 months) but also have not bothered to announce themsleves, so I don't know who places like spuxll, ltuxa, and symplex are. Trying to track down the contact person for these sites is hard because we have no info on them. spuxll is even harder because they get news from abnjh, another site for which we have no information. This is why it's important to have the list and for it to be complete. Obviously, SSC or any other generator of junk mail is obligated to remove anybody from their list who requests it (I think this is a USPS regulation.) And since we do not intend the Usenet directory to be used this way, we are not obligated to help them by marking unwilling junk mail recipients in the master list. (However, if there is sentiment that such marks would be of overall benefit to Usenet, we may consider it.) What I'd like to know is: what is the sentiment of Usenet on this issue - especially the netnews contacts to whom such mail is directed (thus I've added net.news.adm to this list)? Do you object to the Usenet directory (which is currently put into the public domain each month) being used for product mailing lists? What about other things (headhunters come to mind)? Should we include some kind of policy statement in the cover letter that restricts the uses it can be put to? Would it do any good? Mark
scw@cepu.UUCP (03/02/84)
>Personally, I get enough junk mail from lots of random sources that >I never gave my permission to sell my name for, that I don't mind >getting junk mail based on the Usenet directory. Ditto, I think. >I do want to emphasize that the purpose of the Usenet directory >is not for mailing lists ... be complete. HEAR HEAR! >Obviously, SSC or any other generator of junk mail is obligated to >remove anybody [...] we are not obligated to help them by marking >unwilling junk mail recipients in the master list. (However, if there >is sentiment that such marks would be of overall benefit to Usenet, >we may consider it.) I don't think that it's worth your effort. >What I'd like to know is: what is the sentiment >of Usenet on this issue - especially the netnews contacts to whom >such mail is directed (thus I've added net.news.adm to this list)? >Do you object to the Usenet directory (which is currently put into >the public domain each month) being used for product mailing lists? Somehow I think that some of the employers on the net won't like it. especially headhunters. >What about other things (headhunters come to mind)? Should we >include some kind of policy statement in the cover letter that >restricts the uses it can be put to? Would it do any good? I think that it'd be a real good idea to note that the net (is not for) /(should not be used for) comercial purposes. I suspect that a firm statment that violators will be removed from the net, assuming that we can/will do so (dropping their feed?) may do the trick. How about a news group for product announcments and adverts (net.adds or net.madison_ave)? That is a portion of the net that is SPECIFICLY for comercial purposes. Any discussion on this? -- Stephen C. Woods (VA Wadsworth Med Ctr./UCLA Dept. of Neurology) uucp: { {ihnp4, uiucdcs}!bradley, hao, trwrb, sdcsvax!bmcg}!cepu!scw ARPA: cepu!scw@ucla-locus location: N 34 06'37" W 118 25'43"
dave@infopro.UUCP (David Fiedler) (03/04/84)
-->How about a news group for product announcments and adverts (net.adds
-->or net.madison_ave)? That is a portion of the net that is SPECIFICLY
-->for comercial purposes.
-->Any discussion on this?
-->Stephen C. Woods (VA Wadsworth Med Ctr./UCLA Dept. of Neurology)
I think this is a terrific idea. There are probably as many people who like
reading advertisements (which can often be a source of valuable
information) as those who think they stink. Text-only ads, as on the net,
are probably a lot less objectionable than pictures of scantily-clad young
ladies used to sell ball bearings, but they should still have their own
newsgroup. I propose it be called net.ads, and second the motion.
"That's the biz, sweetheart..."
Dave Fiedler
{harpo,astrovax,philabs}!infopro!davejr@qtlon.UUCP (Jim R Oldroyd) (03/06/84)
<> Yes, we should include a notice preventing the list being used by junk mail distributors. If only because it would cut down the amount of transmission time. I mean, I have to pay for a TRANSATLANTIC telephone conversation, and how do you think I feel when I log on in the morning and get tons of trash???! -- ++jim jr@qtlon.uk.UUCP ++jim <england>!ukc!qtlon!jr ++jim
norskog@fortune.UUCP (Lance Norskog) (03/07/84)
This network costs thousands of dollars a month. If the higher management in a lot of places found out they were paying for competitive advertising, plugs would be pulled. NO for net.ads!
jcz@ncsu.UUCP (John Carl Zeigler) (03/07/84)
----------- There have been lots of discussions in the past few years about the presence of ads on the net. Net.wanted and net.jobs grew out of some of these discussions. The consensus seemed to be that ads were OK, if they followed some sort of guidelines. I personally would not like to see ads on the net. Some sites might have political or legal problems with ads, but then they can just turn them off. If you must have ads, then please let us keep them at a civilized level. Perhaps a sort of product announcement type of thing. Here are some suggestions for guidelines for ads. They would have to be confined to a particular group, they would have to meet standards of honesty, (remember, if it lies some flamer will probably heave napalm on net.general!!), and they would have to be rather short. Also, the group, (net.ads?) should be partitioned into types of products, i.e. net.ads.cpu,net.ads.periphs, net.ads.unix,net.ads.lawn-furniture, etc. The ad should explicitly state who is responsible for its contents and who can be reached where to answer questions about it. I do not think ads should contain explicit offers to sell. What do you feel about it?? Sorry to have run on for so long. --jcz John Carl Zeigler North Carolina State University