Seeking the advice and input of ATS members on an important issue...

Am not from the US, but if I can be of service in this noble and worthy war, I'm in!

I'm sure it will eventually come to the rest of the web anyway, so this is of importance to us all!

Originally posted by LordBucket

Please answer the question instead of applying rhetoric.

Honestly I couldn't do a better job answering it that the OP did here.

If you do not see this as one of MANY proposed hurdles to independent expression, and yes commerce, on the net I'm afraid I for one will be unable to persuade you to retreat from the trees.

Edit to add: What an excellent ATS debate topic this would make.

[edit on 25 Nov 2009 by schrodingers dog]

reply to post by schrodingers dog
Alright then, disregard that.

From that perspective SD has it right.

We should sign any petition that compromises free speech in anyway... Any control we can limit we had better do our best. The issue isn't money in the end when you look at it right.

Of coarse its something you should do and im pretty sure that 100% of the users on ATS and other websites would support it. I havent read all of this thread yet so forgive me if its been asked, but what is the chance of this getting passed?

reply to post by kiwifoot


Hey gang, just saw the thread...sign me up and what else can I do? The one eye hole in the burlap sack is quickly being duct taped over...

ColoradoJens

Does ATS belong to any type of small-business association? If not, find an appropriate one and join.

Make sure they have a good/active lobbyist...you and other small Internet businesses need to be heard on Capitol Hill...(and ATS members, please don't respond that lobbyists are evil).

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


i'm all for a petition. this is possibly the most important cause ats and it's members could actively involve itself with.

reply to post by schrodingers dog

I for one will be unable to persuade you to retreat from the trees.

When rhetoric fails, fall back on insults, huh?

I couldn't do a better job answering
it that the OP did here.

I read the post, but at no point does mister.old.school explain why requiring opt-in will kill advertisers. He simply assumes that it will.


---

I think everyone is overreacting, but my take on this is that no law is neccesary. Again, anyone who doesn't want cookies can simply disable them. For example, on my version of IE, I click "tools" then "internet options" choose the "privacy" tab then click "advanced." you'll get a window that looks like this:

img20.imageshack.us/img20/4274/cookiesb.jpg

If I want to be prompted I can select "prompt." There's no need for a legal solution. Nothing is broken.



[edit on 25-11-2009 by LordBucket]

Yes, count me in.

Tell me what, when or where and I'll do what needs to be done.

Note to non voters:

Please register to vote. Your vote does count.

Sorry Bill, had to add that commercial moment.

I won't go into my personal war against the cookie monster for the past 18 years; but, I think I might have an alternative solution for ATS financial loss if they do instigate this manipulative bill.

ATS Member Approved Ads and Banners!

Yes, it might mean hiring a fulltime ad-person, but it might work out better in the end.

There are ads we WANT to see and these companies can be targeted for a "contract" to place their cookie-less ads (Cookie-less while on ATS that is; they'd probably cookie monster their own site which is besides the point.) directly on the web pages ... just like we USED to do when we wrote our own HTML years ago. ATS designed banner ads and maybe a featured (by the hour) ad and a "Visit Our Sponsors" page.

with Cookie Monsters!

Originally posted by LordBucket

I think everyone is overreacting ...

By deduction, you're also implying that the OP of this thread is either misinformed, prone to hyperbole/hysteria, or has another unspoken ulterior motive for his concern/request.

Talk about insulting.

but my take on this is that no law is neccesary.

Actually, I believe we're in agreement there.

A worthy petition, I would sign.
Anyone with abit of sense and knowledge of cookies/how the internet works will sign.

However the paranoid and uninformed are many, and i suspect they will outweigh people like us.

Not only would I sign a petition against any legislation that would limit the freedom of speech on the internet. I would also want to see some viral marketing against such legislation.

Perhaps a video on YouTube, a facebook page, twitter, etc. Show this Rich Boucher, whos boss and what it means when people stand up for the right to freedom of speech.

I was thinking maybe start a video with the American flag, an announcer saying "Rich Boucher hate's America, and wants to undermine all that is decent and good about this great country", throw in some of his more controversial votes for emphasis, then say, "Now Mr. Boucher want's to destroy small business too", then explain his plan in more detail.



[edit on 11/25/2009 by whatukno]

reply to post by schrodingers dog

By deduction, you're also implying that the OP of this thread is either
misinformed, prone to hyperbole/hysteria

Or simply incorrect.

In any case, I've yet to see anyone give any reason to believe the premise that opt-in cookies will destroy the internet. Whereas I've given a counterexample: cookies already are opt-in.

If people want to oppose the law because it's silly, pointless, and unneccesary, so be it. If people want to oppose it because it doesn't make sense to implement a manual opt-in process when there's already an automatic opt-in process built into every web browser made in the past ten years, ok, no problem.


But don't try to convince me to sign a petition by invoking fear and insulting me.

Originally posted by technical difficulties
hey SkepticOverlord, why not just give people the option to donate via paypal? I'm pretty sure some people are more than willing to fund this site.

I can assure you that donations would not cover our hosting/technology costs on a monthly basis.

However, we (ATS) are fortunate enough to have reach a level where, if this were to happen, it would likely hurt, but not kill us. My concerns are highly altruistic and extend to the very valuable (and suddenly fragile) independent web. We'll see if we can collective inspire a loud and undeniable rumble from Internet users such that this bill never gets beyond it's current non-status.

We should most definitely fight this by contacting the key legislators who can stop it.

As a fall back position, if it does pass I don't see how they could keep you from limiting account privileges until people either "opt in" or choose to pay a small fee for an ad free ATS experience.

I know I'd certainly pay for some added perks and no ads.

You could remove U2U, Avatar and implement posting limits where non opt in users have a smaller character limit and can only post so often.

The "privacy" angle being used cannot also be used to force you to provide the same level of service to users who are not willing to support the website. I believe you could modify your T and C so that opting in to advertising or paying a small fee is a requirement for membership to the new, "private" ATS.

Third part cookies bother me a lot less than the disinfo agents who are trying to bring ATS down from the inside.

I will do whatever I can to protect my freedom of speech, I'm with ATS all the way.

Petition is one avenue but remember how many petitions were signed and

how many showed up to protest the government sponsored Health Care Bill

but it still is moving forward no matter what side of the issue you are on. We

must change tactics and the internet is a huge part of our economy including

the world economy.


This is my take on what is happening behind the scenes and to keep our

websites a trade off will be made remember what I say and the trade off will

be taxation of the worldwide net. The internet is a tremendous untaxed

revenue source on goods and services sold on the net and our broke

socialized government is desperate for capturing more money.


Yes our socialized government wants total control of the internet and if you

use the internet in any capacity you will in the future have to pay an offset

tax because your computer uses electricity. This Congress and their staffs

stay up at night and try to figure how to control our lives and how to capture

more money from the hard working Americans. ^Y^

Wait a minute! Wait a minute!

Maybe I'm just being ignorant and/or obtuse, but, since when is the internet American?

For instance: I believe in the US it is illegal to "fileshare" whereas in Canada, it is not. We do so, for the most part, from American sites. So, I'm presuming, that it is the ends, not the means that are controlled by legislation.

So: couldn't you base your operations (servers) elsewhere?

Awaiting corrections...................