Why don't more people think like this? The Real Power of Wireless: "As you think about moving your company into the wireless marketing realm, think about this: If you can target others [with constant unasked-for wireless advertising], you'll probably be a target yourself. What kind of future do you want?" The ugly world that so many marketing corporations are rushing to create will be inhabited by the members of that corporation too. Why are they working so hard to make their own world a living hell?
This is a problem Userland, Pita, and Blogger do not have. They have original content in spades, and a surprising amount of it is really quite good. Perhaps these companies should be actively looking around them, they may find good stuff.
04/25/00 BW Online--Dueling to Be the King of Web Content: "Even as they expand, both syndicators will face the challenge of sameness -- as in the degree of that they confer on customer sites. 'If you go to two different sports sites, they often have the exact same stories,' says Steve Outing, a columnist with trade magazine Editor & Publisher and co-founder of Content-Exchange.com, a specialized syndicator. 'As this evolves, I think there will be more need for more original content.'"
Well, THAT'S not good.
Maryland governor signs UCITA: "Glendening signed the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (UCITA) into law Tuesday. UCITA will take effect Oct. 1; as things stands now, Maryland will be the first state to enact the software licensing measure."
Dawn and Tommy in the Bay joins Linkback. Here's their page Additionally, I've bumped the system up to showing three days' worth of links. When a popular issue arises (which is what the system is really meant for), two is plenty, but three makes more sense for day-to-day operations.
There are some proposed odd scenarios in the article, like "What about a banner ad that promotes an anti-candidate Web site such as NotHillary.com or gwbush.com? Would those ads be deemed 'positive' (for the site) or 'negative' (against the candidate)?" Yeah, well, who cares? Besides, just to add some confusion into the mix, if those ads are considered libelous by someone in Britain, can they sue Yahoo?
You know it can't be that big a deal if I can't get excited about it 
I have a hard time getting upset about banning negative banner ads on Yahoo. I think that moreso then on TV, ads do reflect on the site carrying them, as there is less seperation between ad and content. This lack of seperation causes problems as advertisers abuse this fact to trick people into clicking on ads that look like operating system messages or even a normal part of the site they are viewing. Forcing Yahoo and friends to carry negative banners would directly impact the public perception of the carriers and I can't force them to do that.
Yahoo! vs. Free Speech: "All the big portals have rules governing the types of banner ads that can run on their pages. Some portals have specific guidelines for political advertising. Those guidelines may be good-faith efforts to set ground rules. But in some cases, they have the effect of diminishing the quantity and quality of political expression online. Yahoo!, for example, has a blanket policy prohibiting negative banner ads."