Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!yale!bunker!wtm From: mattioli@took.dec.com (John R. Mattioli) Newsgroups: misc.handicap Subject: Re: ADVERTISEMENT? Message-ID: <10014@bunker.UUCP> Date: 9 Feb 90 05:14:31 GMT Sender: news@bunker.UUCP Reply-To: mattioli@took.dec.com (John R. Mattioli) Distribution: misc Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Lines: 69 Approved: wtm@bunker.UUCP Index Number: 6613 In article <9960@bunker.UUCP>, Vixen.*@f11.n203.z1.fidonet.org (Vixen *) writes... > >My other concern is that if the moderators allow too much sales >promotion in here, ABLED may turn into nothing more than a sales >catalogue. > I think Vixen has just described one of my major concerns very clearly. I'm all for product descriptions, I do it all the time. It's the only way for the word to spread about both good products and bad products. But there's a big difference between me describing (or reviewing) a product and somebody posting an advertisement for a product. Basicly, I post oppinions which, though biased by my experiences and my personal feelings, attempt to look at both sides of the product equally. For example, I think the Arkenstone reader is great for the price but I'm very worried about the company behind it. You'll never read a statement like that in an advertisement. The issue here is that the product be described with a certain amount of objectivity. I feel that this would be very difficult for a product's manufacturer or seller to do (although not impossible). I feel that advertisements tend to sensor the facts more then product reviews tend to leave out the facts. For example, Arkenstone adds tend to stress the advantage of using all off the shelf hardware and software. I do see an advantage to this and I think it's great. But those adds tend not to say that a good portion of the Kurzweil is standard also. Xerox uses the KPR software in some of its high-end office ocr equipment. The scanner is a standard device. The voice synth is (basically) a DECtalk (ok so that one's not exactly off the shelf). Of course there is a very fine line between advertisements and objective product reviews. It is a moderators job to judge the difference. I don't find lots of advertisements posted here, but some of them just tend to rub me the wrong way. For example, I have received via u.s. postal service advertisements from certain newsgroup participants. This "junk mail" was not solicited by me and it annoyed me because it seemed to be an attempt to sneak around the rules of the network. I don't believe that the net should be used for advertisement and I don't believe advertisers should build mailing lists from addresses posted on the net. So why not put this to a vote: 1. Advertising is ok. 2. Advertising is not ok. 3. One product announcement is ok. None of these options should preclude the posting of objective product reviews. My vote is 3. ----------------------------------------------------------------- John Mattioli Most improved skier (american blind skiers association 1989) and humble to! (DEC E-NET) TOOK::MATTIOLI (UUCP) {decvax, ucbvax, allegra}!decwrl!TOOK.dec.com!MATTIOLI (ARPA) MATTIOLI@TOOK.dec.com MATTIOLI%TOOK.dec.com@decwrl.dec.com (US MAIL) John Mattioli 550 King St. LKG2-2/BB9 Littleton, Ma. 01460