It's good to see yet another discussion of the [AD] [/AD] stuff although I'm not very optimistic that the discussion will lead to any type of change. However, I will throw in my viewpoint.
As a list member I really don't get any value from the [AD] [/AD] tags. If I were bothered by posts that mentioned products I guess I could setup a mailbox rule to delete posts that were tagged with [AD]. However, if I did that I would be missing a lot of valuable information. For example, I am a software vendor -- [AD] I sell a resizing tool named FAST. [/AD] I often respond to posts that have to do with file sizing. My response might be, for instance, a two or three paragraph technical discussion of some aspect of hashing or file maintenance. It might conclude with a statement such as [AD] "FAST does a good job of sizing files." [/AD] Should my post be labeled as [AD] in the subject line? Well perhaps -- it does mention the product I sell in a favorable light. But what value does the tag add? If the post is deleted due to the [AD] tag the 90% of the post which contains valuable technical information is tossed out. Or does the reader scan the post and skip the parts delimited by the [AD] [/AD] tags? My point is that the [AD] tags don't add any value for the reader, in my opinion. The world is not so simplistic that a post can be easily classified as [AD] and I find it a bit insulting for someone else to pretend that they can add tags to something that will guide me in my interpretation. Are we so stupid that we cannot properly interpret the world? Perhaps in literature we need to require the authors to tag their writing with [IRONY] [/IRONY] or [METAPHOR] [/METAPHOR] or [SIMILE] [/SIMILE] so that we can properly know how to process what we read! I submit that we are intelligent enough to survive without censorship, abridgement or other externally imposed devices to interpret the world for us. Nearing end of rant... I like Susan's idea of full disclosure via signature information. That shouldn't be a requirement but a voluntary means of increasing one's visibility when posting. In my view the [AD] tags are simply a pain in the ass and not viable. Let the reader figure out his own response -- if Fred writes, "Buy my product AstroCybernetic WhizBang and make your life better!" the reader can decide whether Fred is to be believed and whether the claim bears further investigation or not. Similarly, if Sally claims, "The product AstroCybernetic WhizBang is a piece of sh*t!" the reader can decide whether perhaps Sally has an axe to grind or is a reliable witness -- no tags of [ANTI-AD] [/ANTI-AD] are needed. But I have an idea for a really great product! Are any of you old enough to have seen the movie "Tron?" If so, you will remember that there were "bits" in the movie -- little hovering balls that floated around and could either say "yes" or "no." So they would hover and say "yes" "yes" "no" "yes" randomly. My product will be the Auto Ad Announcer. Suppose you are in the bar at a conference and are talking with a group of other computer geeks. As the discussion progresses the Auto Ad Announcer will use heuristic programming to determine whether anyone's comments could be promoting a product. If so, the Auto Ad Announcer will loudly squawk "AD!" I have absolutely no doubt that this will contribute enormously to the flow and enjoyment of the conversation! Oops, wait, I forgot to tag that sentence with [SARCASM] [/SARCASM] so that you would know how to process it. End of rant... Jeff Fitzgerald Fitzgerald & Long, Inc. ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
