From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Wed Jan 6 19:07:38 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id TAA12843 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 19:07:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA09967; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 15:59:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 40436 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 15:59:10 -0800 Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA09480 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 15:35:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by archimedes.nasa.gov (8.9.2/8.9.ARCHIMEDES) with SMTP id PAA19989 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 15:32:58 -0800 (PST) X-Time-In: 19990106233258 X-Sender: amarine@archimedes.nasa.gov MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-ID: Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 15:32:58 -0800 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: April Marine Subject: second RUN doc? (fwd) Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com I guess I wasn't subscribed from this address! So now I am and here is what I wanted to say... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 15:10:01 -0800 (PST) From: April Marine To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com Cc: uswg@ISI.EDU, April Marine Subject: second RUN doc? Hi all! I was supposed to ask this in Orlando and forgot. But that works out as now we can ask a wider audience on the mailing lists. The RUN Working Group is just getting its "Don't Spew" doc through the IESG. Sally and Gary have been working hard behind the scenes. The WG has one more doc on its charter, usually called the "adverts" doc. This one discusses responsible ways of advertising on the net. (It's meant to be the "do" flipside of the "don't do" SPEW doc. :-) However, this doc is somewhat stalled. Is there interest in continuing to work on this doc? If not, we will declare it obsoleted and close the WG once the other doc is published. So now is the time to speak up if you'd be interested in further developing or reviewing this draft. For those of you unfamiliar with it, I believe the last draft is still available as: draft-ietf-run-adverts-00.txt. Speak up soon please! thanks, April ------------------------------------------------------------------- April Marine 1-650-604-0762 --> me GLOBE Program 1-800-858-9947 --> GLOBE Help Desk (Raytheon ITSS) amarine@globe.arc.nasa.gov NASA Ames Research Center, MS 204/14, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000 (and IETF User Services Area Director http://archimedes.nasa.gov/usv/) From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Thu Jan 7 18:56:37 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id SAA14473 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 18:56:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA25200; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:48:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 40403 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:48:06 -0800 Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA25136 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:38:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by archimedes.nasa.gov (8.9.2/8.9.ARCHIMEDES) with SMTP id PAA21794 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:36:11 -0800 (PST) X-Time-In: 19990107233611 X-Sender: amarine@archimedes.nasa.gov MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-ID: Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:36:11 -0800 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: April Marine Subject: Re: second RUN doc? (fwd) Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com and another... what do people think? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 08:43:55 -0700 From: Bill Austin To: April Marine Subject: Re: second RUN doc? I have read through the draft and for the most part it appears to be fluff and things you should not do. If it stays that way, it will not be of much use. There is a lot of "trying to be amusing" stuff at the beginning which would keep most readers from getting to the meat of the information. Then there is a lot of negative "don't do these things" details which belong in the other document and could be referenced. Finally, they have left out many of the most effective current methods and have provided no details of how to go about advertising responsibly. I would see this document as a cookbook for Internet advertisers just starting out. If they get the "best practices" statement only, it should give them enough details on effective methods that they do not go out and "invent" or discover the bad methods. Imagine my surprise a couple of years ago when I went to http://www.yahoo.com/ and did a search on the word Motorola and got a banner advertisement for Qualcomm cellular phones. April Marine wrote: > Hi all! > > I was supposed to ask this in Orlando and forgot. But that works out as -- Bill Austin Motorola, SSG http://www.mot.com/sstg/ http://worldnet.att.net/~wbaustin/ President, AzTeC Computing Free-Net http://aztec.asu.edu/ From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Thu Jan 7 18:56:45 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id SAA14483 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 18:56:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA25211; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:48:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 40407 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:48:08 -0800 Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA25133 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:38:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by archimedes.nasa.gov (8.9.2/8.9.ARCHIMEDES) with SMTP id PAA21790 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:35:52 -0800 (PST) X-Time-In: 19990107233552 X-Sender: amarine@archimedes.nasa.gov MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-ID: Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:35:51 -0800 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: April Marine Subject: Re: second RUN doc? (fwd) Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com I have Bill's permission to forward a couple of comments from him on the adverts doc. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 08:19:03 -0700 From: Bill Austin To: April Marine Subject: Re: second RUN doc? I think that it is just as important to tell people what they can do as it is to tell them what they should not do. This "how to advertise responsibly" document should be an important one. For example, there are certain things which you can do but for which a patent has been issued (priceline.com) and royalties might be due. If the "Don't Spew" does not address what can be done then I believe the adverts document may be needed. April Marine wrote: > Hi all! > > I was supposed to ask this in Orlando and forgot. But that works out as > now we can ask a wider audience on the mailing lists. > > The RUN Working Group is just getting its "Don't Spew" doc through the > IESG. Sally and Gary have been working hard behind the scenes. The WG > has one more doc on its charter, usually called the "adverts" doc. This > one discusses responsible ways of advertising on the net. (It's meant to > be the "do" flipside of the "don't do" SPEW doc. :-) > > However, this doc is somewhat stalled. Is there interest in continuing to > work on this doc? If not, we will declare it obsoleted and close the WG > once the other doc is published. So now is the time to speak up if you'd > be interested in further developing or reviewing this draft. > > For those of you unfamiliar with it, I believe the last draft is still > available as: draft-ietf-run-adverts-00.txt. > > Speak up soon please! > > thanks, > April > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > April Marine 1-650-604-0762 --> me > GLOBE Program 1-800-858-9947 --> GLOBE Help Desk > (Raytheon ITSS) amarine@globe.arc.nasa.gov > NASA Ames Research Center, MS 204/14, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000 > (and IETF User Services Area Director http://archimedes.nasa.gov/usv/) -- Bill Austin http://sstg.geg.mot.com/~p23393/ President, AzTeC Computing Free-Net http://aztec.asu.edu/ From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Mon Jan 11 13:52:04 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id NAA23915 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 13:52:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA07208; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:41:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 40095 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:41:15 -0800 Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA07201 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:41:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by archimedes.nasa.gov (8.9.2/8.9.ARCHIMEDES) with SMTP id KAA02768 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:38:33 -0800 (PST) X-Time-In: 19990111183833 X-Sender: amarine@archimedes.nasa.gov MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-ID: Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:38:33 -0800 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: April Marine Subject: Re: second RUN doc? (fwd) Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Forwarding with permission... April ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 18:58:48 -0500 (EST) From: tevans@altavista.net To: April Marine Subject: Re: second RUN doc? (fwd) Hello April. I just wanted to voice my opinion on the Responsible Advertizing draft. I feel that it is important because it illustrates several options for advertizers who might want to influence the internet audience. It is well written and positive. The only suggestion that I have is to give statistical data that will convince advertizers to use other forms of internet advertising. For example, how effective is mass mailing and what percentage of internet users get a positive or negative image of the sender. Conversely, the draft should show data that points out how effective it is to place a banner advertisement on a related site or having a website that a search engine will list when a user is looking for information related to the product or service the advertiser is pushing. I like the form that this draft is taking. It is optimistic and helpful and not a damning letter threatenning commercial types to STAY OFF THE NET. Personally I would like researchers like myself to abandon the WWW and start another HTML/JAVA network that will ban comercial ventures again. Sincerely, Thomas E. Evans Jr. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Get your free email from AltaVista at http://altavista.iname.com From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Wed Jan 13 21:09:44 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id VAA23151 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 21:09:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA18651; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 17:58:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 43753 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 17:58:50 -0800 Received: from torque.pothole.com ([209.94.126.195] (may be forged)) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA18644 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 17:58:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by torque.pothole.com (8.8.2/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA24532 for IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:55:57 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: torque.pothole.com: localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol X-Mts: smtp Message-ID: <199901140155.UAA24532@torque.pothole.com> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:55:57 -0500 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" Subject: Re: Adverts draft Comments: To: IETF-RUN To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 30 Sep 1998 16:00:23 PDT." <9809302300.AA24441@Ludwig.sc.intel.com> From: Sally Hambridge Message-ID: <9809302300.AA24441@Ludwig.sc.intel.com> Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 16:00:23 PDT Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com >IETF-RUNNERS: > >... > >And Donald's info is out of date. I don't really see that my stuff is out of date... See trivial diddles below.. >Anyway - Have at it! >Sally >sallyh@ludwig.sc.intel.com > >IETF RUN Working Group Sally Hambridge >Internet-Draft Intel Corp. SC11-321 >draft-ietf-run-adverts-01.txt 2200 Mission College Blvd >Expires April, 1999 Santa Clara, CA 95052 > > Donald Eastlake 3rd > 318 Acton Street > Carlisle, MA 01741 USA should be: 65 Shindegan Hill Road Carmel, NY 10512 USA > > > $$$$$ MAKE ENEMIES FAST $$$$$ > or > How to advertise responsibly using the Internet > [Insert I-D Boilerplate Here] > >... > >8. APPENDIX > >Most readers of this document probably already understand why >"Pyramid" or "Ponzi" schemes are fraudlent and, in most places, >criminal. However, for those who do not, the following is provided: > > >A.1 The classic pyramid > >In the classic pryamid scheme, there is a list of a few people, you >send money to one or all of them, and then you shift that person off >the list and add your name to the list and send it to N people. The >idea is that when your name gets to the special place on the list, you >will get lots of money. The problem is that this only works for >everyone if there are an infinite number of people available. > >As an example, lets look at a message with a list of four people where >you send five dollars to each, drop the top name, and add your name at >the bottom. There is probably also some stuff about sending "reports" >to people who send in money. And assume the rules encourage you to >send out lots of copies until you get ten direct responses, 100 second >level responses, etc., and claim there is a guarantee that you will >make lots of money fast if you follow the procedure. > >First, note that someone or group has to have started this. When they >did, they got to specify all four names so it was probably four people >working together to split any profits they might get from being the >top of the pyramid (or maybe they send out four versions of the >original letter with their name order rotated). > >And while the letters that accompany these things usually have all >kinds of junk in them about following the instructions exactly, the >most rational thing for you to do if you decided to participate in >such a thing, would be to (1) send no money to anyone else, and (2) >find three other people and replace all the names on the list. But >lets assume that not just you but everyone who ever participates >decides to follow the "rules" and to avoid the start up transient, >lets assume that it starts with one name on the list and for the next >three layers of people, a name gets added and only after the list is >up to four does everyone start dropping the top name. > >What does this look like after nine levels if everything works >perfectly? This table shows for 9 levels how many people have to >participate, what each person pays out, gets in, and nets. > >.nf >Level People Out In Net > 1 1 0 $55,550 $55,550 > 2 10 $5 $55,550 $55,545 > 3 100 $10 $55,550 $55,540 > 4 1,000 $15 $55,550 $55,535 > 5 10,000 $20 $55,550 $55,530 > 6 100,000 $20 $5,550 $5,530 > 7 1,000,000 $20 $550 $530 > 8 10,000,000 $20 $50 $30 > 9 100,000,000 $20 0 -20 >.fi > >So if this scheme ever got this far, which is pretty unlikely, over >10,000 people would have made the "guaranteed" over $50,000. But the >problem is that to do that, a hundred million people (or over ten >thousand times are many) are out twenty dollars. And it can't >continue because you are running out of people. Level 10 would take a >billion people all of whom have $20 to mail off, which probably don't >exist. Level 11 would take ten billion, more people than exist on the >earth. > >Pyramid schemes are always like this. A few people who start them may make >money but only because the vast majority lose money. People who particpate >and expect to make any money, except possibly those who start it, are being >defrauded and for this reason such scheme are illegal in many countries. > > >A.2 What about Ponzi? > >A Ponzi scheme is very similar to a pyramid except that all the money goes >through a single location. They are named after a person in Boston who >claimed to have a way to earn huge returns on money by buying international >postal reply coupons and redeming them in postage for more than their cost. >Early "investors" in this scheme did get paid, but only with money that later >investors were putting in. He was really doing nothing with the money other >than living off it and paying some of the new "investors" money out to old >"investors". Just like early pyramid participants make make money off of >later ones. > >Just as pyramids always collapse, Ponzi schemes always collapse also, when >the new people and new money run out. This can have serious consequences. >People died and much of the country's savings were squandered when huge Ponzi >schemed that seemed to be partly backed by the government in Albania >collapsed. A bit clearer to say: "People died in Albania and much of the country's savings were squandered when huge Ponzi schemed that seemed to be backed by the government collapsed." >A.3 So all multi-levels are evil? > >No, all multi-level systems are not the same. > >If what you have moving around is just money and maybe "reports" or the like >that are very cheap to produce, then almost certainly it is a criminal scam. >If there are substantial goods and/or services being sold through the system >at reasonable prices, it is more likely to be legitimate. > >If it says you can make lots of money "fast" or "easy" or "guaranteed", be >very suspicious. If it says you may be able to make lots of money by putting >in lots of hard work over many months but there is no guarantee, then it may >be OK. > >If people are paid to recruit "members" or can "buy" a high "level", it is >almost certainly a criminal scam. If people are paid only for the sale of >substantial goods and/or services, it is more likely to be legitimate. > >It may also be worth your while to look at the history of the organization >and its founders/leaders. The longer it has been around, the more likely it >is to continue being around. If its founders or leader have a history of >fraud or crime, maybe you should think very carefully before being part of >it. "There are only three multi-level sales systems that have been in existence for over 30 years and survived mulitple legal challenges: Amway, Mary Kay, and Shacklee." >Sally Hambridge >Intel Corp >2200 Mission College Blvs >Santa Clara, CA 95052 >saallyh@ludwig.sc.intel.com ^ sally? > >Donald E. Eastlake 3rd >318 Acton Street >Carlisle, MA 01741 USA >dee@cybercash.com Should now be: 65 Shindegan Hill Road Carmel, NY 10521 USA dee3@us.ibm.com =================================================================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1 914-276-2668 dee3@torque.pothole.com 65 Shindegan Hill Rd, RR#1 +1 914-784-7913(w) dee3@us.ibm.com Carmel, NY 10512 USA From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Thu Jan 14 11:06:33 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id LAA08172 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:06:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA26347; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 07:53:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 42735 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 07:53:44 -0800 Received: from crotus.sc.intel.com (crotus.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.26]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA26340 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 07:53:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from Ludwig.sc.intel.com (ludwig.sc.intel.com [143.183.2.83]) by crotus.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.6 1998/11/24 22:10:56 iwep Exp iwep $) with SMTP id HAA29577 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 07:51:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by Ludwig.sc.intel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07722; Thu, 14 Jan 99 07:53:32 PST Message-ID: <9901141553.AA07722@Ludwig.sc.intel.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 07:53:32 PST Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: Sally Hambridge Subject: Re: Adverts draft Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Indeed, I meant your author info, not your prose.... Sorry that wasn't clear. Sally sallyh@ludwig.sc.intel.com > > >> >>And Donald's info is out of date. > >I don't really see that my stuff is out of date... See trivial >diddles below.. > >> >> Donald Eastlake 3rd >> 318 Acton Street >> Carlisle, MA 01741 USA > >should be: > 65 Shindegan Hill Road > Carmel, NY 10512 USA > >> --HAA21556.916328925/clio.sc.intel.com-- From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Thu Jan 14 14:04:08 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id OAA14315 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 14:04:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA29270; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 10:55:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 43087 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 10:55:21 -0800 Received: from rmx07.globecomm.net (rmx07.iname.net [165.251.8.75]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA29080 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 10:45:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from weba3.iname.net by rmx07.globecomm.net (8.9.1/8.8.0) with ESMTP id NAA05618 ; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 13:43:02 -0500 (EST) Received: (from root@localhost) by weba3.iname.net (8.9.1a/8.9.2.Alpha2) id NAA18383; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 13:43:02 -0500 (EST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <9901141343020Q.17069@weba3.iname.net> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 13:43:02 -0500 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: Thomas Evans Subject: PYRAMID? PONZI? Comments: To: IETF To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Actually, I'm not sure what Pyramid and Ponzi have to do with mass mailing. It is not made clear in the draft and might be unnecessary. Are many unsolicitted email messages about pyramid schemes? I don't know since I always delete messages from senders that I do not recognize (so worried about catching a virus). Or are you referring to the snowball effect of responding to messages and building more lists as described in "DON'T SPEW"? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Get your free email from AltaVista at http://altavista.iname.com From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Thu Jan 14 14:29:08 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id OAA15085 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 14:29:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA29772; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:19:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 43207 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:19:01 -0800 Received: from crotus.sc.intel.com (crotus.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.26]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA29765 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:19:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from Ludwig.sc.intel.com (ludwig.sc.intel.com [143.183.2.83]) by crotus.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.6 1998/11/24 22:10:56 iwep Exp iwep $) with SMTP id LAA09363 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:16:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by Ludwig.sc.intel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08031; Thu, 14 Jan 99 11:18:50 PST Message-ID: <9901141918.AA08031@Ludwig.sc.intel.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:18:50 PST Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: Sally Hambridge Subject: Re: PYRAMID? PONZI? Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Oh yes! Many mass mailings are for pyramid schemes. It's probably useful to make it a clearer link from the draft. Sally sallyh@ludwig.sc.intel.com >From: Thomas Evans > >Actually, I'm not sure what Pyramid and Ponzi have to do with mass mailing. It is not made clear in the draft and might be unnecessary. Are many unsolicitted email messages about pyramid schemes? I don't know since I always delete messages from senders that I do not recognize (so worried about catching a virus). Or are you referring to the snowball effect of responding to messages and building more lists as described in "DON'T SPEW"? > From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Thu Jan 28 17:20:39 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id RAA09976 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 17:20:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA25606; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:08:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 45530 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:08:50 -0800 Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA25591 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:08:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by archimedes.nasa.gov (8.9.2/8.9.ARCHIMEDES) with SMTP id OAA05301; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:06:31 -0800 (PST) X-Time-In: 19990128220631 X-Sender: amarine@archimedes.nasa.gov MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-ID: Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:06:30 -0800 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: April Marine Subject: editor wanted Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Hi all, Sally and I were talking about the group and I discovered she gets to take a sabbatical soon. The rat! Uh, I mean, how nice for her. However, since she's the main editor currently on the adverts draft (responsible advertising), that does leave that work kind of in the lurch. There seemed to be some interest from people on the list in having the doc completed. Is anyone interested enough to become the co-editor/author? It would entail being responsible for incorporating suggested changes (or inventing change to meet suggestions), getting a draft or two out, soliciting feedback from the mailing list, and sheparding the doc on its way to RFC. This group will not meet in Minneapolis, but this doc is far enough along that someone can take the work (we think) and complete it with online input. Any takers? Please let me or Sally know if you are interested. thanks! April ------------------------------------------------------------------- April Marine 1-650-604-0762 --> me GLOBE Program 1-800-858-9947 --> GLOBE Help Desk (Raytheon ITSS) amarine@globe.arc.nasa.gov NASA Ames Research Center, MS 204/14, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000 (and IETF User Services Area Director http://archimedes.nasa.gov/usv/) From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Fri Jan 29 10:06:56 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id KAA29464 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 10:06:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA07778; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 06:52:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 45375 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 06:52:41 -0800 Received: from motgate2.mot.com (motgate2.mot.com [129.188.136.102]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA07562 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 06:42:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from pobox.mot.com (pobox.mot.com [129.188.137.100]) by motgate2.mot.com (8.8.5/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id IAA20032 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:41:29 -0600 (CST) Received: from mail1.sat.mot.com (mail1-pri.sat.mot.com [170.1.23.100]) by pobox.mot.com (8.8.5/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id IAA00256 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:39:46 -0600 (CST) Received: from email.mot.com ([137.162.39.100]) by mail1.sat.mot.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.01) with ESMTP id AAA14120 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 07:39:44 -0700 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en]C-mc405a (WinNT; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------C869DDE2532CAD1BC7C0A3E4" Message-ID: <36B1C82F.205F4152@email.mot.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 07:39:43 -0700 Reply-To: Bill_Austin-P23393@email.mot.com Sender: IETF-RUN Comments: ( Received on motgate2.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender Bill_Austin-P23393@email.mot.com ) From: Bill Austin Organization: Motorola SSTG Subject: Re: editor wanted To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------C869DDE2532CAD1BC7C0A3E4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I would be willing to take this on. Bill Austin Motorola ITSS President, AzTeC Computing Free-Net April Marine wrote: > Hi all, > > Sally and I were talking about the group and I discovered she gets to take > a sabbatical soon. The rat! Uh, I mean, how nice for her. > Any takers? Please let me or Sally know if you are interested. -- Bill Austin http://home.att.net/~wbaustin/ http://aztec.asu.edu/ http://www.mot.com/sstg/ --------------C869DDE2532CAD1BC7C0A3E4 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Bill Austin Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf" begin: vcard fn: Bill Austin n: Austin;Bill org: Information Technology Solutions and Services (ITSS) adr: 8220 E. Roosevelt Drive;;MS R3238;Scottsdale;AZ.;85257-0219;USA email;internet: Bill_Austin-P23393@email.mot.com title: Principal Engineer tel;work: 602-675-1765 tel;fax: 602-441-6181 x-mozilla-cpt: 137.101.87.128;2 x-mozilla-html: TRUE version: 2.1 end: vcard --------------C869DDE2532CAD1BC7C0A3E4-- From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Fri Jan 29 12:09:15 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id MAA02745 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:09:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA09348; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:58:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 45648 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:58:40 -0800 Received: from crotus.sc.intel.com (crotus.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.26]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA09341 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:58:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from Ludwig.sc.intel.com (ludwig.sc.intel.com [143.183.2.83]) by crotus.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.6 1998/11/24 22:10:56 iwep Exp iwep $) with SMTP id IAA09708; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:56:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by Ludwig.sc.intel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23428; Fri, 29 Jan 99 08:58:52 PST Message-ID: <9901291658.AA23428@Ludwig.sc.intel.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:58:52 PST Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: Sally Hambridge Subject: Re: Editor wanted Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com Comments: cc: Bill_Austin-P23393@email.mot.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Thanks, Bill. I can re-post the draft and feedback I've gotten since the last posting. It's a good way to remind everyone of where we are in the draft, anyway. April and I really appreciate this!! Sally sallyh@ludwig.sc.intel.com > > >I would be willing to take this on. > >Bill Austin >Motorola ITSS >President, AzTeC Computing Free-Net > From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Fri Jan 29 12:51:35 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id MAA03809 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:51:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA10240; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:40:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 45811 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:40:39 -0800 Received: from clio.sc.intel.com (clio.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.25]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA10232 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:40:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from Ludwig.sc.intel.com (ludwig.sc.intel.com [143.183.2.83]) by clio.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.6 1998/11/24 22:10:56 iwep Exp iwep $) with SMTP id JAA18400 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:38:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by Ludwig.sc.intel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23509; Fri, 29 Jan 99 09:40:52 PST Message-ID: <9901291740.AA23509@Ludwig.sc.intel.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:40:52 PST Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: Sally Hambridge Subject: Editors Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com April has told me we have three! volunteers to help with the document. Bill Austin, Ted Galvin, and Alex French. I'll repost the doc and feedback, then Bill, Ted, Alex, April and I will coordinate and figure out who wants to do what. I really appreciate everyone stepping up to help. For those of you wondering, my husband and I are taking a cruise through the Panama Canal. We'll toast you with Rum drinks as you sit in the Hilton. In Minnesota. In March. Sally sallyh@ludwig.sc.intel.com From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Fri Jan 29 14:20:29 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id OAA05584 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 14:20:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA12387; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:05:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 46205 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:05:40 -0800 Received: from crotus.sc.intel.com (crotus.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.26]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA12380 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:05:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from Ludwig.sc.intel.com (ludwig.sc.intel.com [143.183.2.83]) by crotus.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.6 1998/11/24 22:10:56 iwep Exp iwep $) with SMTP id LAA14148 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:03:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by Ludwig.sc.intel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23593; Fri, 29 Jan 99 11:05:51 PST Message-ID: <9901291905.AA23593@Ludwig.sc.intel.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:05:51 PST Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: Sally Hambridge Subject: The draft from last year with no revisions Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com IETF-RUNNERS - here's the version of the draft as it stands without the incorporation of the feedback received in January. I will send all that feedback too, so expect a bit of mail. April tells me the Spew draft is progressing in the IESG, so we really need to concentrate on this doc. It needs a fair amount of work - perhaps a complete re-work. So - here it is and the next few messages will have the feedback. Sally sallyh@ludwig.sc.intel.com IETF RUN Working Group Sally Hambridge Internet-Draft Intel Corp. SC11-321 draft-ietf-run-adverts-01.txt 2200 Mission College Blvd Expires April, 1999 Santa Clara, CA 95052 Donald Eastlake 3rd 318 Acton Street Carlisle, MA 01741 USA $$$$$ MAKE ENEMIES FAST $$$$$ or How to advertise responsibly using the Internet [Insert I-D Boilerplate Here] 0. Abstract Contrary to popular belief, the Internet did not spring fully-clothed from Zeus's head, but it did grow like kudzu. This growth engendered a large new user population some of whom are more than willing to use the Internet in ways for which it was never intended. This seems to be especially true about people who are new to the Internet and see it as the perfect advertising vehicle. Those people are sure to "make enemies fast" by sending mass unsolicited mailing or posting advertisements heedlessly to news groups. This document gives some guidelines and advice about how to advertise responsibly using the Internet. 1. Introduction A lot of the population which is new to the Internet think that the Internet "old guard" (defined as anyone who was using the Internet before the invention of web browsers) are diametrically opposed to using the Internet for advertising. This is not true. But in general, Internet culture opposes use of the network in irresponsible ways and this usually includes people who advertise by sending unsolicited information to Netnews groups and Internet mailing lists. People who "spam" mailing lists and Netnews groups depend on the cooperative nature of the Internet protocols as they were developed during times when there were no Internet advertisers. The protocols do not associate costs with volume of messages sent. Although it makes the Internet an attractive medium for advertising (because it seems cheap), it really shifts the cost from the sender to the recipient. The recipient pays for connectivity, for the cost of downloading the message, for disk space, and for the time needed to deal with the mail. The sender bears a very small fraction of the overall cost. This is why many Internet citizens have come to think of receiving unsolicited mail as "theft of service". It has also come to be called "Internet Pollution." There is money to be made through Internet advertising (although surveys show that selling goods and services on the Internet is not as rewarding as selling routers and network connections - as it was more rewarding during the Gold Rush in California to sell shovels and Levis(R).) This document recommends ways to advertise on the Internet which will not engender hate-mail or threats of law-suits. It does not guarantee freedom from those things, but it should reduce the volume of any complaints you might receive to a level with which most humans can cope. 2. Items and Areas to avoid Even though it is financially attractive to advertise via mass unsolicited mail or by mass postings to netnews, AVOID THIS TEMPTATION. You may make money. You make get some interested customers. You may expand your business. But you will alienate hundreds to thousands of people. You will damage your credibility. You may even lose your connectivity. Advertising on the Internet means taking responsibility for the persona you create. Remember the Golden Rule (and in this case we do not mean the version which states "he who has the gold makes the rule"): treat others as you want to be treated. It is important for the Internet advertiser to maintain a quality reputation for fairness, honesty, and integrity. This is dictated by the rate at which both information and disinformation travel on the Internet. If you get a reputation for being unfair, dishonest, and fraudulent DESERVED OR NOT it will take a very long time for you to overcome the stigma. With this in mind, you MUST NOT in any way forge information in messages you send or in information you post. Changing the information about yourself or the machines which handle your traffic in ways which obscure your true identity (forging) is now illegal in several jurisdictions and people have been successfully prosecuted. Illegal or not, don't do it if you want to maintain your spotless reputation. It is also unethical to use network resources of another party or person without their express permission. You MUST NOT send mail through a mail host which belongs to anyone else without their permission (mail relaying). Be very careful in soliciting information from people on the Internet. As the saying goes, "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog" [1]. You will not be able to tell from whom you are collecting information and they may not be a legal adult. In other words, you may be dealing with a nine-year old. Let people know you are collecting data and what you plan to do with the information you are collecting. Remember that the laws on what is legal to collect vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and make sure you understand these legal implications. As an example, it is illegal to collect trade-union affiliations of people in the United Kingdom. There are other restrictions in other countries. 3. Know your target audience There are two parts to knowing your target audience: ths first is to actually TARGET the audience; and the second is getting to KNOW the audience. As simple as this sounds, it seems as if most Internet advertisers don't bother with either step. One feels that it should be obvious to all that marketing an idea, goods, or services should be targeted at an audience which is receptive to them. Shotgunning your message doesn't really work in any medium, but is much easier to do with the Internet than with paper mail or telephone solicitations. Just because you (as an advertiser) don't pay an immediate fee for sending out unsolicited ads doesn't mean you pay nothing. You will pay in poor response time, in being mail-bombed, in having your account pulled by your Internet Service Provider, and in having your ISP's network "black-holed" by other sites trying to stem the tide of unsolicited stuff. All of this is costly in time, if not in actual currency. All this cost could be avoided if you take the time to figure out WHO really needs to see your message. Do your research! Find out WHICH Netnews groups are discussing topics in your area of interest; use the search engines such as Yahoo, Lycos, and AltaVista to determine how other people have selected their audiences or set up appropriate web sites. BUT DO NOT BUY A MAILING LIST AND/OR MAILING LIST SOFTWARE AND BROADCAST YOUR MESSAGE WILLY-NILLY TO ALL. This is not a good thing. Target your audience. Now that you know WHO should receive your message, find out HOW they prefer to receive it. Many many mailing lists and Netnews groups hate loathe and abhor unsolicited ads of any kind. Others are receptive to ads for items which relate to the discussion at hand. Others may have a special methodology they wish advertisers to follow, such as asking the moderator for permission, or the moderator may prefer to cumulate all ads, and post a periodic digest of them. The list or group may have a FAQ (a list of Frequently Asked Questions) in which their policy is stated. Be sure to read and comply. In order to discover how your audience is going to respond, it is a good practice to actually READ the postings of the group (or list) for two full months BEFORE you post anything. Two months seems like an eternity in Internet time, but in that two month period, you will learn what you need to know about the group to guarantee you don't violate any of their rules. 4. Alternatives Your need is immediate. You don't have two months you can wait. What should you do? You may begin to advertise your goods and services immediately if you choose "passive" methods to do so rather than actively sending messages or posts. Why not buy advertising space on an existing World Wide Web site? Many sites on the World Wide Web support themselves by selling space for advertisers. This method has several advantages: it's probably cheaper than putting up your own site (Be aware: Your Milage May Vary); You are using resources which already exist; Depending on the site from which you advertise your ad may be specifically targetted at the most receptive audience. Your message could become part of a larger context supporting free email accounts, free Internet access, or even broadcast news. Alternatively, you can put up your own web site. There are many companies who design and host web sites for businesses of every size and type. They will be able to get you through the decisions of whether or not you resigter as your own domain or use the domain name of your service provider/host. They will be able to make recommendations about the equipment needed, and give you 24x7 (that's 24 hours by 7 days - full coverage) support and do regular backups. Keep your site fresh by making sure your information is up to date, and that any links you may have to other sites are correct. (Of course, you should ask a site for permission before linking to it.) Put your product information in easy-to-read and easy-to-find format. The latest wizzy technology is never the lowest common denominator, so decide where your site falls in this spectrum. Make sure you understand any legal ramifications of advertising your products. Certain jurisdictions frown on content which is sexually oriented while others don't care. Make sure you understand the implications of World Wide advertising before starting your enterprise, including trademarks and copyrights. No matter what method you choose to use on the Web, there are a few more caveats about customer interactions: first, make sure your contact information - name, phone, email address - are all clear and available; second, be careful in creating forms which gather information about your customers as there is concern in the U.S. about gathering information from minors without parental consent AND there is concern about grabbing use information via persistent state information; third, if you DO gather information about people and plan to use it for marketing in any way be VERY clear to specify your plans as people sign up. 5. DOs and DON'Ts of emailed advertising You can't afford a Web site or even to advertise on other sites, and mailing your information is about your only option. Here are some "do's and don'ts". First, the don'ts. DON'T forge your mail headers to make it look as if your messages orginate from anywhere other than where they really originate. DON'T send out any sort of bogus message to "cover" your intended activity. In other words, don't pretend that a personal message from you to someone else was sent to a mailing list by mistake so that you can use the body of that message to advertise. "Dear Tony - had a great time a lunch yesterday. Per your request, here's the information on the latest widget I promised - blah blah blah." DON'T use aggravating headers such as "Our research shows you're interested in our product." Most of your recipients know this is usually a fraudulent claim. DON'T create mailing lists from third party sources. Many people create mailing lists from addresses which they have gathered in mildly to extremely unethical ways. Many of these list-makers rely on grabbing volumes of addresses without checking their legitimacy. In other words, they send out software robots to grab addresses they find in News or Mailing List archives which may be many years old! People change jobs, change ISPs, change everything about themselves over time and trusting a third party for a mailing list is just not wise. That third party may even have created a mailing list from email eddresses of people who have asked to be REMOVED from their mailing lists. They then sell these lists to unsuspecting merchants who think they're getting a list of people who will welcome the unsolicited information. Enough negativity! DO create a lively signature which tells the minimum about your product/service. But keep it to 4 lines total. DO participate in mailing lists and newsgroups which discuss topics related to your product/service. You will find folks of a similar interest there and many potential customers. So long as you aren't obnoxious in your interactions with these groups you will find your participation quite rewarding. DO ask people if they want to be part of any mailing list you create. Be clear about your intentions of how you plan to use the list and any other information you collect. DO tell people how you gathered your list data. If they've signed up from a web page, make sure they know they will be getting mail. Many web pages have getting mail selected as default. Our recommendation should be that the default should be that they do NOT wish to receive mailings - even if they find your site of interest. DO keep your list to yourself. Selling it would not be ethical. DO let people know how to get off your list. Make this as easy as possible, DO let people know what you plan to do with any data you collect. Make sure that what you plan to do is legal. You can check with the web site of the Better Business Bureau which operates in the U.S. and Canada. (www.bbb.org) They have several programs and services which can help advertisers in those countries, and have other resources which will benefit advertisers of any nationality. 6. FROM THE REAL WORLD Nearly every Internet Service Provider today has an "Acceptable Use Policy" (AUP) which describes how its customers are expected to behave. Violating the AUP is grounds for having your account terminated. If an ISP seems to have trouble enforcing its AUP or if the AUP is weak enough to be unenforceable, other ISPs or organizations have taken the initiative to block network addresses from the offending provider. If you 7. REFERENCES [1] Steiner, P. _New Yorker_. July 5, 1993. p.61. 8. APPENDIX Most readers of this document probably already understand why "Pyramid" or "Ponzi" schemes are fraudlent and, in most places, criminal. However, for those who do not, the following is provided: A.1 The classic pyramid In the classic pryamid scheme, there is a list of a few people, you send money to one or all of them, and then you shift that person off the list and add your name to the list and send it to N people. The idea is that when your name gets to the special place on the list, you will get lots of money. The problem is that this only works for everyone if there are an infinite number of people available. As an example, lets look at a message with a list of four people where you send five dollars to each, drop the top name, and add your name at the bottom. There is probably also some stuff about sending "reports" to people who send in money. And assume the rules encourage you to send out lots of copies until you get ten direct responses, 100 second level responses, etc., and claim there is a guarantee that you will make lots of money fast if you follow the procedure. First, note that someone or group has to have started this. When they did, they got to specify all four names so it was probably four people working together to split any profits they might get from being the top of the pyramid (or maybe they send out four versions of the original letter with their name order rotated). And while the letters that accompany these things usually have all kinds of junk in them about following the instructions exactly, the most rational thing for you to do if you decided to participate in such a thing, would be to (1) send no money to anyone else, and (2) find three other people and replace all the names on the list. But lets assume that not just you but everyone who ever participates decides to follow the "rules" and to avoid the start up transient, lets assume that it starts with one name on the list and for the next three layers of people, a name gets added and only after the list is up to four does everyone start dropping the top name. What does this look like after nine levels if everything works perfectly? This table shows for 9 levels how many people have to participate, what each person pays out, gets in, and nets. .nf Level People Out In Net 1 1 0 $55,550 $55,550 2 10 $5 $55,550 $55,545 3 100 $10 $55,550 $55,540 4 1,000 $15 $55,550 $55,535 5 10,000 $20 $55,550 $55,530 6 100,000 $20 $5,550 $5,530 7 1,000,000 $20 $550 $530 8 10,000,000 $20 $50 $30 9 100,000,000 $20 0 -20 .fi So if this scheme ever got this far, which is pretty unlikely, over 10,000 people would have made the "guaranteed" over $50,000. But the problem is that to do that, a hundred million people (or over ten thousand times are many) are out twenty dollars. And it can't continue because you are running out of people. Level 10 would take a billion people all of whom have $20 to mail off, which probably don't exist. Level 11 would take ten billion, more people than exist on the earth. Pyramid schemes are always like this. A few people who start them may make money but only because the vast majority lose money. People who particpate and expect to make any money, except possibly those who start it, are being defrauded and for this reason such scheme are illegal in many countries. A.2 What about Ponzi? A Ponzi scheme is very similar to a pyramid except that all the money goes through a single location. They are named after a person in Boston who claimed to have a way to earn huge returns on money by buying international postal reply coupons and redeming them in postage for more than their cost. Early "investors" in this scheme did get paid, but only with money that later investors were putting in. He was really doing nothing with the money other than living off it and paying some of the new "investors" money out to old "investors". Just like early pyramid participants make make money off of later ones. Just as pyramids always collapse, Ponzi schemes always collapse also, when the new people and new money run out. This can have serious consequences. People died and much of the country's savings were squandered when huge Ponzi schemed that seemed to be partly backed by the government in Albania collapsed. A.3 So all multi-levels are evil? No, all multi-level systems are not the same. If what you have moving around is just money and maybe "reports" or the like that are very cheap to produce, then almost certainly it is a criminal scam. If there are substantial goods and/or services being sold through the system at reasonable prices, it is more likely to be legitimate. If it says you can make lots of money "fast" or "easy" or "guaranteed", be very suspicious. If it says you may be able to make lots of money by putting in lots of hard work over many months but there is no guarantee, then it may be OK. If people are paid to recruit "members" or can "buy" a high "level", it is almost certainly a criminal scam. If people are paid only for the sale of substantial goods and/or services, it is more likely to be legitimate. It may also be worth your while to look at the history of the organization and its founders/leaders. The longer it has been around, the more likely it is to continue being around. If its founders or leader have a history of fraud or crime, maybe you should think very carefully before being part of it. Sally Hambridge Intel Corp 2200 Mission College Blvs Santa Clara, CA 95052 saallyh@ludwig.sc.intel.com Donald E. Eastlake 3rd 318 Acton Street Carlisle, MA 01741 USA dee@cybercash.com From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Fri Jan 29 14:27:57 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id OAA05742 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 14:27:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA12463; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:09:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 46223 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:09:48 -0800 Received: from clio.sc.intel.com (clio.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.25]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA12456 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:09:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from Ludwig.sc.intel.com (ludwig.sc.intel.com [143.183.2.83]) by clio.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.6 1998/11/24 22:10:56 iwep Exp iwep $) with SMTP id LAA22314 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:07:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by Ludwig.sc.intel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23602; Fri, 29 Jan 99 11:10:01 PST Message-ID: <9901291910.AA23602@Ludwig.sc.intel.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:10:01 PST Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: Sally Hambridge Subject: Feedback msgs Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com Various feedback msgs - in no particular order.... From IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Thu Jan 7 15:58:41 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com by Ludwig.sc.intel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01751; Thu, 7 Jan 99 15:58:36 PST Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA25200; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:48:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 40403 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:48:06 -0800 Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA25136 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:38:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by archimedes.nasa.gov (8.9.2/8.9.ARCHIMEDES) with SMTP id PAA21794 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:36:11 -0800 (PST) X-Time-In: 19990107233611 X-Sender: amarine@archimedes.nasa.gov Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:36:11 -0800 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: April Marine Subject: Re: second RUN doc? (fwd) Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Status: R and another... what do people think? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 08:43:55 -0700 From: Bill Austin To: April Marine Subject: Re: second RUN doc? I have read through the draft and for the most part it appears to be fluff and things you should not do. If it stays that way, it will not be of much use. There is a lot of "trying to be amusing" stuff at the beginning which would keep most readers from getting to the meat of the information. Then there is a lot of negative "don't do these things" details which belong in the other document and could be referenced. Finally, they have left out many of the most effective current methods and have provided no details of how to go about advertising responsibly. I would see this document as a cookbook for Internet advertisers just starting out. If they get the "best practices" statement only, it should give them enough details on effective methods that they do not go out and "invent" or discover the bad methods. Imagine my surprise a couple of years ago when I went to http://www.yahoo.com/ and did a search on the word Motorola and got a banner advertisement for Qualcomm cellular phones. April Marine wrote: > Hi all! > > I was supposed to ask this in Orlando and forgot. But that works out as -- Bill Austin Motorola, SSG http://www.mot.com/sstg/ http://worldnet.att.net/~wbaustin/ President, AzTeC Computing Free-Net http://aztec.asu.edu/ From IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Thu Jan 7 15:58:46 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com by Ludwig.sc.intel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01756; Thu, 7 Jan 99 15:58:44 PST Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA25211; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:48:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 40407 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:48:08 -0800 Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA25133 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:38:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by archimedes.nasa.gov (8.9.2/8.9.ARCHIMEDES) with SMTP id PAA21790 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:35:52 -0800 (PST) X-Time-In: 19990107233552 X-Sender: amarine@archimedes.nasa.gov Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:35:51 -0800 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: April Marine Subject: Re: second RUN doc? (fwd) Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM I have Bill's permission to forward a couple of comments from him on the adverts doc. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 08:19:03 -0700 From: Bill Austin To: April Marine Subject: Re: second RUN doc? I think that it is just as important to tell people what they can do as it is to tell them what they should not do. This "how to advertise responsibly" document should be an important one. For example, there are certain things which you can do but for which a patent has been issued (priceline.com) and royalties might be due. If the "Don't Spew" does not address what can be done then I believe the adverts document may be needed. April Marine wrote: > Hi all! > > I was supposed to ask this in Orlando and forgot. But that works out as > now we can ask a wider audience on the mailing lists. > > The RUN Working Group is just getting its "Don't Spew" doc through the > IESG. Sally and Gary have been working hard behind the scenes. The WG > has one more doc on its charter, usually called the "adverts" doc. This > one discusses responsible ways of advertising on the net. (It's meant to > be the "do" flipside of the "don't do" SPEW doc. :-) > > However, this doc is somewhat stalled. Is there interest in continuing to > work on this doc? If not, we will declare it obsoleted and close the WG > once the other doc is published. So now is the time to speak up if you'd > be interested in further developing or reviewing this draft. > > For those of you unfamiliar with it, I believe the last draft is still > available as: draft-ietf-run-adverts-00.txt. > > Speak up soon please! > > thanks, > April > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > April Marine 1-650-604-0762 --> me > GLOBE Program 1-800-858-9947 --> GLOBE Help Desk > (Raytheon ITSS) amarine@globe.arc.nasa.gov > NASA Ames Research Center, MS 204/14, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000 > (and IETF User Services Area Director http://archimedes.nasa.gov/usv/) -- Bill Austin http://sstg.geg.mot.com/~p23393/ President, AzTeC Computing Free-Net http://aztec.asu.edu/ From IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Thu Jan 14 11:06:20 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com by Ludwig.sc.intel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07987; Thu, 14 Jan 99 11:06:18 PST Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA29270; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 10:55:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 43087 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 10:55:21 -0800 Received: from rmx07.globecomm.net (rmx07.iname.net [165.251.8.75]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA29080 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 10:45:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from weba3.iname.net by rmx07.globecomm.net (8.9.1/8.8.0) with ESMTP id NAA05618 ; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 13:43:02 -0500 (EST) Received: (from root@localhost) by weba3.iname.net (8.9.1a/8.9.2.Alpha2) id NAA18383; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 13:43:02 -0500 (EST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <9901141343020Q.17069@weba3.iname.net> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 13:43:02 -0500 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: Thomas Evans Subject: PYRAMID? PONZI? Comments: To: IETF To: IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Status: R Actually, I'm not sure what Pyramid and Ponzi have to do with mass mailing. It is not made clear in the draft and might be unnecessary. Are many unsolicitted email messages about pyramid schemes? I don't know since I always delete messages from senders that I do not recognize (so worried about catching a virus). Or are you referring to the snowball effect of responding to messages and building more lists as described in "DON'T SPEW"? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Get your free email from AltaVista at http://altavista.iname.com From IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Wed Jan 13 18:12:00 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com by Ludwig.sc.intel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07306; Wed, 13 Jan 99 18:11:55 PST Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA18651; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 17:58:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 43753 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 17:58:50 -0800 Received: from torque.pothole.com ([209.94.126.195] (may be forged)) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA18644 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 17:58:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by torque.pothole.com (8.8.2/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA24532 for IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:55:57 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: torque.pothole.com: localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol X-Mts: smtp Message-Id: <199901140155.UAA24532@torque.pothole.com> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:55:57 -0500 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" Subject: Re: Adverts draft Comments: To: IETF-RUN To: IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 30 Sep 1998 16:00:23 PDT." <9809302300.AA24441@Ludwig.sc.intel.com> Status: R From: Sally Hambridge Message-ID: <9809302300.AA24441@Ludwig.sc.intel.com> Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 16:00:23 PDT Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.intel.com >IETF-RUNNERS: > >... > >And Donald's info is out of date. I don't really see that my stuff is out of date... See trivial diddles below.. >Anyway - Have at it! >Sally >sallyh@ludwig.sc.intel.com > >IETF RUN Working Group Sally Hambridge >Internet-Draft Intel Corp. SC11-321 >draft-ietf-run-adverts-01.txt 2200 Mission College Blvd >Expires April, 1999 Santa Clara, CA 95052 > > Donald Eastlake 3rd > 318 Acton Street > Carlisle, MA 01741 USA should be: 65 Shindegan Hill Road Carmel, NY 10512 USA > > > $$$$$ MAKE ENEMIES FAST $$$$$ > or > How to advertise responsibly using the Internet > [Insert I-D Boilerplate Here] > >... > >8. APPENDIX > >Most readers of this document probably already understand why >"Pyramid" or "Ponzi" schemes are fraudlent and, in most places, >criminal. However, for those who do not, the following is provided: > > >A.1 The classic pyramid > >In the classic pryamid scheme, there is a list of a few people, you >send money to one or all of them, and then you shift that person off >the list and add your name to the list and send it to N people. The >idea is that when your name gets to the special place on the list, you >will get lots of money. The problem is that this only works for >everyone if there are an infinite number of people available. > >As an example, lets look at a message with a list of four people where >you send five dollars to each, drop the top name, and add your name at >the bottom. There is probably also some stuff about sending "reports" >to people who send in money. And assume the rules encourage you to >send out lots of copies until you get ten direct responses, 100 second >level responses, etc., and claim there is a guarantee that you will >make lots of money fast if you follow the procedure. > >First, note that someone or group has to have started this. When they >did, they got to specify all four names so it was probably four people >working together to split any profits they might get from being the >top of the pyramid (or maybe they send out four versions of the >original letter with their name order rotated). > >And while the letters that accompany these things usually have all >kinds of junk in them about following the instructions exactly, the >most rational thing for you to do if you decided to participate in >such a thing, would be to (1) send no money to anyone else, and (2) >find three other people and replace all the names on the list. But >lets assume that not just you but everyone who ever participates >decides to follow the "rules" and to avoid the start up transient, >lets assume that it starts with one name on the list and for the next >three layers of people, a name gets added and only after the list is >up to four does everyone start dropping the top name. > >What does this look like after nine levels if everything works >perfectly? This table shows for 9 levels how many people have to >participate, what each person pays out, gets in, and nets. > >.nf >Level People Out In Net > 1 1 0 $55,550 $55,550 > 2 10 $5 $55,550 $55,545 > 3 100 $10 $55,550 $55,540 > 4 1,000 $15 $55,550 $55,535 > 5 10,000 $20 $55,550 $55,530 > 6 100,000 $20 $5,550 $5,530 > 7 1,000,000 $20 $550 $530 > 8 10,000,000 $20 $50 $30 > 9 100,000,000 $20 0 -20 >.fi > >So if this scheme ever got this far, which is pretty unlikely, over >10,000 people would have made the "guaranteed" over $50,000. But the >problem is that to do that, a hundred million people (or over ten >thousand times are many) are out twenty dollars. And it can't >continue because you are running out of people. Level 10 would take a >billion people all of whom have $20 to mail off, which probably don't >exist. Level 11 would take ten billion, more people than exist on the >earth. > >Pyramid schemes are always like this. A few people who start them may make >money but only because the vast majority lose money. People who particpate >and expect to make any money, except possibly those who start it, are being >defrauded and for this reason such scheme are illegal in many countries. > > >A.2 What about Ponzi? > >A Ponzi scheme is very similar to a pyramid except that all the money goes >through a single location. They are named after a person in Boston who >claimed to have a way to earn huge returns on money by buying international >postal reply coupons and redeming them in postage for more than their cost. >Early "investors" in this scheme did get paid, but only with money that later >investors were putting in. He was really doing nothing with the money other >than living off it and paying some of the new "investors" money out to old >"investors". Just like early pyramid participants make make money off of >later ones. > >Just as pyramids always collapse, Ponzi schemes always collapse also, when >the new people and new money run out. This can have serious consequences. >People died and much of the country's savings were squandered when huge Ponzi >schemed that seemed to be partly backed by the government in Albania >collapsed. A bit clearer to say: "People died in Albania and much of the country's savings were squandered when huge Ponzi schemed that seemed to be backed by the government collapsed." >A.3 So all multi-levels are evil? > >No, all multi-level systems are not the same. > >If what you have moving around is just money and maybe "reports" or the like >that are very cheap to produce, then almost certainly it is a criminal scam. >If there are substantial goods and/or services being sold through the system >at reasonable prices, it is more likely to be legitimate. > >If it says you can make lots of money "fast" or "easy" or "guaranteed", be >very suspicious. If it says you may be able to make lots of money by putting >in lots of hard work over many months but there is no guarantee, then it may >be OK. > >If people are paid to recruit "members" or can "buy" a high "level", it is >almost certainly a criminal scam. If people are paid only for the sale of >substantial goods and/or services, it is more likely to be legitimate. > >It may also be worth your while to look at the history of the organization >and its founders/leaders. The longer it has been around, the more likely it >is to continue being around. If its founders or leader have a history of >fraud or crime, maybe you should think very carefully before being part of >it. "There are only three multi-level sales systems that have been in existence for over 30 years and survived mulitple legal challenges: Amway, Mary Kay, and Shacklee." >Sally Hambridge >Intel Corp >2200 Mission College Blvs >Santa Clara, CA 95052 >saallyh@ludwig.sc.intel.com ^ sally? > >Donald E. Eastlake 3rd >318 Acton Street >Carlisle, MA 01741 USA >dee@cybercash.com Should now be: 65 Shindegan Hill Road Carmel, NY 10521 USA dee3@us.ibm.com =================================================================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1 914-276-2668 dee3@torque.pothole.com 65 Shindegan Hill Rd, RR#1 +1 914-784-7913(w) dee3@us.ibm.com Carmel, NY 10512 USA From IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Mon Jan 11 10:54:12 1999 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com by Ludwig.sc.intel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05116; Mon, 11 Jan 99 10:54:09 PST Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA07208; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:41:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 40095 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:41:15 -0800 Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA07201 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:41:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from archimedes.nasa.gov (archimedes.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.92.30]) by archimedes.nasa.gov (8.9.2/8.9.ARCHIMEDES) with SMTP id KAA02768 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:38:33 -0800 (PST) X-Time-In: 19990111183833 X-Sender: amarine@archimedes.nasa.gov Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:38:33 -0800 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: April Marine Subject: Re: second RUN doc? (fwd) Comments: To: ietf-run@mailbag.cps.intel.com To: IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Status: R Forwarding with permission... April ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 18:58:48 -0500 (EST) From: tevans@altavista.net To: April Marine Subject: Re: second RUN doc? (fwd) Hello April. I just wanted to voice my opinion on the Responsible Advertizing draft. I feel that it is important because it illustrates several options for advertizers who might want to influence the internet audience. It is well written and positive. The only suggestion that I have is to give statistical data that will convince advertizers to use other forms of internet advertising. For example, how effective is mass mailing and what percentage of internet users get a positive or negative image of the sender. Conversely, the draft should show data that points out how effective it is to place a banner advertisement on a related site or having a website that a search engine will list when a user is looking for information related to the product or service the advertiser is pushing. I like the form that this draft is taking. It is optimistic and helpful and not a damning letter threatenning commercial types to STAY OFF THE NET. Personally I would like researchers like myself to abandon the WWW and start another HTML/JAVA network that will ban comercial ventures again. Sincerely, Thomas E. Evans Jr. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Get your free email from AltaVista at http://altavista.iname.com