On The Insider: Britney's Bikini-Clad Top 10
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 6 of 23:
Next »
« Previous
My Computer Dictionary Isn't Here Yet
And I have yet to see the idea of 'opt-in,opt-out placed into them from those I have.
However between the two of them,''Content,Consent" can still be used. The derivatives of just how these camps are conversing of advertising practices,should not however disaffect the ability of the receipients control to persuade they do not wish to receive any further advertisements.

Even if the adjucency of agreements between email advertisement sender,and advertisement receiver has been made, the courtesy should be to access that 'do-no-solicit as valid.

The descreprency to justify what an advertiser does that is lawful,or practiced should not bear overly drawn attention here.But what a valid return address means,and what is meant by controlling these solicitations.

These need to be controled,not justified,or indemnified outside of mechanical functionality.

To make both opt-in,and opt-out both as certainty of vagueness,consider 'do-not-solicit,as the same as a courtesy (by law) necesary for an advertisement.

A point of unsubscribe rationalizes 'opt-in.Or a point of 'do-not-solicit being inconsistent with it . Or as opt-out doing so does ....Or is not opt-in (as legal mentioned agreement indemifying the advertiser)...

I would only give credit to lawmakers for making their laws. Certainly neither anybody is going to opt-in,or opt-out, or share do not solicit this when the law is passed.

Just some kind of courtesy,neither opt-in,nor opt-out should deprive this.And the mechanical mention and means to use it should be readily apharent.


.....-just talking.
Posted by: ParadigmOdyssey   Posted on: 11/25/03 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

If the Direct Marketing Association  issthatso | 11/25/03
Disregard above message  issthatso | 11/25/03
DMA is a joke and so is the Legislation  shawkins | 11/26/03
ADV in the subject line  ddollinger | 12/02/03
if the get rich quick ads  lmaxwell | 11/25/03
My Computer Dictionary Isn't Here Yet  ParadigmOdyssey | 11/25/03
Only solution is to charge the advertiser for the spam  GregSalts | 11/25/03
Suprised? Not hardly.  worknman | 11/25/03
This isn't the first time  Sunny Jalolly | 11/25/03
Opt-out our representatives!  TheSlumlord | 11/25/03
AMEN !!! (NT)  Update victim | 11/27/03
hell im gonna start spamming  JoeMama_z | 11/25/03
Ok, but.....  James T. Kirk | 11/26/03
Well, now we know what the Spammers will be thankful for.....  James T. Kirk | 11/26/03
What a pandering waste of taxpayers' money  Taz_z | 11/26/03
Ineffectual legislation now on TWO continents.  kingsley_z | 11/26/03
All About the MONEY and Compatible  donald.coe@... | 11/26/03
Be careful unless you like gov censorship  Robert Rice | 11/26/03
Freedom of speech includes my right not to listen  Squawkbox | 11/28/03
Good censorship vs. bad (and spam is bad)  shawkins | 11/28/03
Freedom of speech is irrelevent  rbethell | 11/28/03
This isn't going to work as it targets the wrong people  bitfuzzy | 11/29/03
89%  wresnick | 12/15/03

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here