On 9 December 2011 14:58, Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't accept your false equivalence between Harvard/Science Po and > McDonalds, nor do I believe you misunderstood my point: that > advertising is commonly rejected for its potential for various harms, > while even those who object to this banner have not rationally > presented any possible harm that could result.
It increases acceptance of advertising logos at the top of the page. Getting your logo at the top of a top-5 website? That's *rather* valuable. Note that this was one of the big objections to the Virgin Unite logo in the fundraiser five years ago. Logo = advertising, however much equivocation one applies to the point. - d. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
