On Wed, 3 Jul 1996 17:54:07 EDT, Bill Gruber wrote:
>OK, if you're worried then how about:
>- make it clear to him that commercial use of your list is not allowed and
>- set his subscription to REVIEW?
 
A polling organization (possibly as a self-serving form of denial) is not
likely to perceive information GATHERING as a commercial use.  Setting the
subscription to REVIEW won't accomplish much if the whole purpose is to
"lurk" on the list to learn what others are saying.  The Gallup
organization is reputable (individual employees might vary, as with any
organization and the real worry may be with Gallup's customers who may not
all be worthy of anyone's seal of approval) and would not want to bias
information by being a visible presence.
 
Also, just because someone works for Gallup or any other marketing
organization, are they any less entitled to participate in forums as long
as they follow standard netiquette?  After all, if a marketer wants to be
nefarious, it's easy and inexpensive to buy an account from any one of
hundreds of ISPs and subscribe under any old John Doe.  Our subscription
lists already have many people who are not exactly what they seem (a fact
that usually is revealed by an inadvertent glitch that causes a strange
undeliverable mail message or a message to the list that's clearly
off-the-wall and sometimes off-the-planet).
 
The July 15 Marketing News has a report on a recent workshop on Internet
privacy sponsored by the FTC.  The short version is that the FTC wants to
give self-regulation a chance before supporting regulation or legislation.
The problem, as I see it, is that legitimate marketers already understand
that because sellers pay for paper mail while users pay to receive email
the two are not equivalent.  It's the scumballs (and braindead) who send
four line promos with 90K of "To" that need to be regulated off the
net--those folks aren't about to self-regulate (heck they aren't even
interested in using the technology efficiently).
 
I've been in touch with my Congressman (one of the first in the House to
set up an email address) on this issue.  My Congressman (or someone on his
staff) answers email.  In the course of discussing this issue, I found that
Congressional staffs are aware there's a problem because so many bozos send
blanket mail to everyone in Congress that their mail system has been set to
simply filter (sometimes with an explanation) mail from any host/domain not
identifiable as from the Congressperson's home district.  In short, I can't
complain to lots of Congresspeople, only to my own.  Will you join me in
asking YOUR Congressperson to ask the FTC not to delay regulating the
bozos.  It should be possible to figure out some sensible regulations that
would not penalize legitimate marketers, particularly those like Reilly's
that have been long time supporters of the net's development.
 
/s Murphy A. Sewall <[log in to unmask]>      (860) 486-2489 voice
   Professor of Marketing                          (860) 456-7725 fax
   http://mktg.sba.uconn.edu/MKT/Faculty/Sewall.html