6 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2019
    1. Too often “membership” is a code for “paywall”, with outlets paying lip service to genuine engagement with their paying subscribers. This is not at all the case in the outlets covered in the report. The memberships both help sustain the sites financially, but also bring community benefits to both the editorial staff and the members.

      I'll note here that it's the same sort of free business that allows spam to exist in the email space. If we needed to pay some modest amount for each email, then spammers wouldn't exist because it would be prohibitively expensive for them to operate the way they do.

  2. Oct 2019
    1. We recently discovered that when you provided an email address or phone number for safety or security purposes (for example, two-factor authentication) this data may have inadvertently been used for advertising purposes, specifically in our Tailored Audiences and Partner Audiences advertising system. 

      Twitter may have sold your e-mail address to people.

      Twitter has only done this with people who have added their e-mail address for security purposes.

      Security purposes for Twitter = sell your e-mail address to a third-party company.

      Spam for you = security purposes for Twitter.

  3. Dec 2016
  4. Apr 2016
    1. appreciate your help

      I think that a major part of improving the issue of abuse and providing consent is building in notifications so that website owners will at least be aware that their site is being marked up, highlighted, annotated, and commented on in other locations or by other platforms. Then the site owner at least has the knowledge of what's happening and can then be potentially provided with information and tools to allow/disallow such interactions, particularly if they can block individual bad actors, but still support positive additions, thought, and communication. Ideally this blocking wouldn't occur site wide, which many may be tempted to do now as a knee-jerk reaction to recent events, but would be fine grained enough to filter out the worst offenders.

      Toward the end of notifications to site owners, it would be great if any annotating activity would trigger trackbacks, pingbacks, or the relatively newer and better webmention protocol of the WW3C out of the http://IndieWebCamp.com movement. Then site owners would at least have notifications about what is happening on their site that might otherwise be invisible to them.

      Perhaps there's a way to further implement filters or tools (a la Akismet on platforms like WordPress) that allow site users to mark materials as spam, abusive, or other so that they are then potentially moved from "public" facing to "private" so that the original highlighter can still see their notes, but that the platform isn't allowing the person's own website to act as a platform to give reach to bad actors.

      Further some site owners might appreciate graded filters (G, PG, PG-13, R, X) so that users or even parents can filter what they're willing to see. Consider also annotations on narrative forms that might be posted as spoilers--how can these be guarded against? (Possibly with CSS and a spoiler tag?) Options can be built into the platform itself as well as allowing server-side options for truly hard cases.

      My coding skills are rustier than I wish they were, but I'm available to help/consult if needed.

  5. Jan 2016
    1. WARNING: MiniInTheBox sends up to three spam emails a week once you provide your email address. Google "MiniInTheBox spam", and you will find 1000's of complaints about their use of spam, undelivered products, and overall bad support.

  6. May 2015
    1. As remoções solicitadas devem ser cumpridas pelos remetentes, pois toda agencia séria respeita seu consumidor e isso é uma evolução no email, pois em sua TV não tem como você solicitar a remoção de uma propaganda.