Index Page SITEMETERS: Member Abuse or Fascist Excuse?

[29th_Candidate]

Once again, "we've got trouble-- …right here in River City."

As reluctant as I am to provide epinions' most notorious abuser and Product-Info Poser, {X}, inadvertent free publicity or encouragement, my own ceaseless quest to transform the tripe-tarnished topography of SCADStropolis into a virtual, Norman Rockwell-depicted, 1940's Saturday Evening Post cover compels otherwise.* Since I (or someone in my employ) keep abby-user {X}'s profile page under surveillance at all times, I was quick to notice a disturbing modification on the "favorite websites" section of Mr. One's page. In it, a reference was made to the "Sitemeter" website, which I couldn't suppress the feeling, was not genuinely meant to endorse that company's service.

I immediately began to "smell blood."* Where one observes a sitemeter endorsement, one's diligent search shall SURELY discover a sitemeter nearby! Granted, "sitemeter-havin'" didn't have many prosecutorial teeth in its jack-o-lantern smile, as far as abuse goes, but hey, abuse is abuse is abuse! Right?* The experienced tracker doesn't ignore his prey just because the lawmakers don't consider the law worth enforcing!* I began to feel that heady rush one experiences when he is hot on the trail of an abuser; about to pounce on his unsuspecting prey, "make the kill," so to speak…

I wanted to ask him outright, whether he had a sitemeter, but this would DEFINITELY have tipped him off; given him notice that he was displaying it without epinions' "express written permission," perhaps have unnecessarily afforded him a chance to correct his evil deed… THEN where would I have been? I wouldn't have been able to gloat, pat myself on the back or put another notch in my gun-barrel for that! (Well, not honestly, anyway.)* How did I know that he was displaying his sitemeter without epinions' "express written permission?"* I availed myself of scientific methods of analysis and procedure, so my conclusion would be both reliable and accurate, of course:* I carefully studied and observed his head proportions and facial features… Just LOOK at that profile picture; --the shifty, beady eyes… the low "criminal" bridge of the forehead!" Do you think, in a million years, HE'D seek written permission?!* Please!

I did not find this reported-one's sitemeter right away; even after scanning his profile page a few times. Then suddenly, I SPOTTED IT! He was a clever abuser, this one. He had obviously been trying to slyly "hide it in plain view;"
make his sitemeter SO apparent and SO overly-obvious I'd overlook it... How could he have ever KNOWN the master "tracker"-tracker with whom he would some day, have to deal? Flushed with pride over my exciting victory, I completed the kill, cutting off all potential avenues of escape, by reporting him to EP Abuse RIGHT away! That'll teach HIM to blatantly mind his own, damned business in my face like that! Imagine!

Now wait a second-- don't go saying: "Ohhhhh, bur-r-rotherrr... here we go againnnn..." just yet; please... Sure, I deserve it, but that's entirely besides the point. Besides, I'm doing my best to be serious about this; not an easy task after one has been surrounded by genuinely consequential matters most of the day, in the non-virtual world.

Please be patient with me. I'm doing my best to keep an open mind about this, but it is not very easy...


THE (INITIAL) DISCUSSION ISSUES:

--Should epinions put aside its perennially permissive attitude towards account holders whose profile pages have sitemeters, despite a clause in the TOS which requires epinions' "express written permission" in order to do so?

--Should EP, instead, adopt a "no-tolerance" policy regarding sitemeter-havers; one that perhaps includes actively treating sitemeter-havers as "abusers," subject to all the punishments and censures pertaining thereto?

--Is it improper, perhaps even abusive behavior for zealots, vigilantes and police-state proactivists to actively harass, persecute and/or engage in other divisive forms of behavior towards account holders who have sitemeters, in spite of epinions management's apparent long-standing decision NOT to pursue its potential options in this regard? ...In spite of the persecutors' inability to determine whether or not the purported "abuser" DOES have "express written permission?"

--In any event, is this sort of behavior consistent with GENUINE concern for the well-being of the site? What harm is caused by those who DO have a sitemeter on their profile page? Is having "caller-ID" on one's telephone harmful?

--Considering that the non-commercial function of sitemeters is to track and deter potential abusers, do those of you who are NOT "the Kravitzes" (i.e., the Stevens' nosey next-door neighbors on the Nic-At-Nite™-televised reruns of "Bewitched,") or are not "officious meddlers," suffer any (non-imaginary) harm consequent to other, "own-business-minding" members maintaining sitemeters on their profile pages?

--Is anyone familiar with a viable, legal concept called "implied consent," which one or another of the parties to an otherwise legally-binding contract, employ to nullify or override expressly-written terms contained in that contract?


Jim --29th --A 1 1/2 years-long Sitemeter-displayer, (who, back in June of '00, sent two letters to Epinion's Customer Care requesting permission and further advisement, but received no response.)

[wivabef]

Jim...

Have you been practicing your filibuster skills, again?

[rich2003dm]

I am, as you all know, a charitable soul. My initial inclination was to give ****** a pass on the sitemeter since I assume he has one out of ignorance, which pretty much sums up how he operates in everything he does.

But then I thought, "Screw the ignorant SOB. Let's hang his ignorant ass."

I think we should all report him to abuse and DEMAND that he be forced to remove not only his sitemeter, but any photograph bearing his likeness because of the potential for frightening and revolting consumers and driving them away from this site.

Besides, even if he isn't really guilty in this case, we all know that he MUST be guilty of something.

Rich

[29th_Candidate]

Originally posted by wivabef
Jim...

Have you been practicing your filibuster skills, again?

There's always one sure way to know I'm practicing my filibuster skills, wivabef; observe whether my mouth is open (unless I have a cold, in which case, I may just be trying to breathe. If I have a cold, focus on "lip movement;" ...any.)

:p

[29th_Candidate]

Originally posted by rich2003dm
I am, as you all know, a charitable soul. My initial inclination was to give ****** a pass on the sitemeter since I assume he has one out of ignorance, which pretty much sums up how he operates in everything he does.

But then I thought, "Screw the ignorant SOB. Let's hang his ignorant ass."

I think we should all report him to abuse and DEMAND that he be forced to remove not only his sitemeter, but any photograph bearing his likeness because of the potential for frightening and revolting consumers and driving them away from this site.

Besides, even if he isn't really guilty in this case, we all know that he MUST be guilty of something.

Rich

Uhhhmmmm, Rich? Surely a man of such insight and vision as your post demonstrates you to be, must also be an experienced practitioner of the Tarot or Palm-Reading sciences? I am astounded!

You've accomplished a truly amazing feat, here. I had written the questions/issues of my original post intending that there be no particular right or wrong response for any of them. How is it that you've, nonetheless, somehow achieved a perfect score?

You up for a long-term, high-paying job in the D.C. area?

"Besides, even if he isn't really guilty in this case, we all know that he MUST be guilty of something."

How on EARTH could he NOT be?! If nothing else, he associates with pogomom and petra; two CONFIRMED witches! Beat'em hard enough over a long enough period of time and they'll always tell you the truth, I say!

If I don't hear back from Epins Abuse in 48 hours, I'm going to break into his home and check his mattresses for blatantly torn-off manufacturer's labels... THEN you'll see the dam burst open...

[29th_Candidate]

Hey? What happened to my lead-in, "***** sitemeter" story? It goes to what made me consider the issues; now the only part left of the original post!

29th_filibusted

[conradd]

Sorry Jim, EA has a long-standing prohibition against naming (other people's) names in a negative manner. I saved the text and will send it to you if you want to revise it, but the name can't stay in. It's one of the guidelines that makes EA a friendly forum.

Thanks for understanding.

Deb

[rich2003dm]

Deb,

I understand where you're coming from on this, but it sort of takes all the fun out of ragging on you know who.

It just ain't the same if he can't see it and respond in an appropriate manner.

Rich

[conradd]

Sorry, Rich, I'm not trying to be a party pooper . . . but. If the "gentleman" in question chooses to come in and self-identify, the party can continue.

Deb

[slick4591[$]]

Deb is right. EA has been down this road before and it wasn't pretty.

[29th_Candidate]

Would it be sufficient if I had him leave a note in a posted comment, Deb?

[conradd]

****** is welcome to join the conversation at any time. I realize this is all good fun among friends, but we've had similar situations that weren't so benign. Apologies for the side-track - and, yes, if he leaves a note that excuses EA from all liability for libel (you're the legal expert here), it's fine with me.

Deb

[Sordid-1]

Hi,

I think there is a distinct possibility that I might be the ******* in question, and, as such I grant full permission to anyone to slam, laud, or otherwise use my name in any way, shape, or form, and do not hold EA liable for any libel or any other negative form of communication.

EAers, you have a free ticket to take out some sordid vengeance.

xxxxoooo,
S-1

Technically, such java scripts as Sitemeters are against the epinions TOS however, I don't bother reporting them. Well actually, I stopped reporting them after I turned in ******. I figure that ****** must be either sleeping with someone on the staff OR he slips them a $20 every time someone turns him in.

[Joubert[$]]

I'm curious about Sitemeter in general. I ran it for a year or more on my profile page (no, I don't think I'm ******, but who knows?).

I took it down only because everyone was having a highly politicized war, and I was tired of defending the thing. Epinions' site, Epinions' rules.

I used Sitemeter to see what prompted people to visit my profile page -- search engines, links from here, comments, whatever. That made me a more effective contributor for me - although probably not for the site in general, although learning how to write for search engine placement certainly helps Epinions. I only used it for a nefarious purpose once. A rather naive user had put me on his block list apparently because I rated one of his reviews low and left a comment explaining why. He then began revenge-rating my reviews with anonymous NHs. Unfortunately for him, the dolt would check my profile page using the link from his block list. So yeah, I blocked him back.

Now that we're not in a pay per click world anymore, I wonder if it makes sense for Epinions to revisit this policy and allow folks to track activity to their profile page. There are only three reasons I can think of that Epinions would be against such a thing:
[list=1][*]Statistics manipulation[*]Scripting that the site doesn't control that could lead to crashes, or worse, hacks[*]Privacy issues - although that's a stretch in my opinion[/list=1]

Can anyone think of anything else regarding Sitemeter and similar scripts?

[nicholmere]

I have always thought that it would be nice if Epinions could offer the writers feedback on where their hits were coming from. As was mentioned in another thread, we can see our non-member reads go up, but we have no idea who those readers are. Are we getting hits because readers are researching a specific product, or did we happen to include enough titillating words that google picked us up during someone's search for sex? I do not see an appropriate use for sitemeter as a way to track other members, one man's abuser is another man's champion, but if they could help members learn what attracts people to a review then that would be helpful.

[Sordid-1]

Hello Newman… errr, Jim,

I just wanted to drop you a quick note to congratulate you on your keen detective work. With all the time you devote to not providing consumers scads of valuable research data, I’m surprised you were able to juggle your schedule in such a way to allow you to track down this notorious abuser. But you have done so, and even circumvented his clever ploy of hiding the abusive “site meter” in plain sight. You are a cagey hunter, Jim, the biblical Nimrod has nothing on you!

29th_Bandicoot:
--Is it improper, perhaps even abusive behavior for zealots, vigilantes and police-state proactivists to actively harass, persecute and/or engage in other divisive forms of behavior towards account holders who have sitemeters, in spite of epinions management's apparent long-standing decision NOT to pursue its potential options in this regard? ...In spite of the persecutors' inability to determine whether or not the purported "abuser" DOES have "express written permission?"

In all seriousness, I think you are overstating the issue a bit here. It is with great, great shame (okay, with utter indifference) that I admit (okay, proclaim) that I have sullied my profile page (okay, improved my profile page) with an insidiously evil (okay, with a really cool) Site Meter.

I think it should be apparent that the clause prohibiting such information-gathering devices is geared towards preventing commercial concerns that traffic in data from profiting from whatever could be gleaned from Epinions (without giving Brisbane a cut), and Epinions mngmt. has no particular concern about private users having such a device to track search engine hits and show reading trends (aka pretty graphs). This perception, primarily driven by common sense, is somewhat solidified by Epinions inactions. I mean, I believe there are still plenty of states/townships that have anti-sodomy regulations on the books, but I don’t see cops busting down doors to try to catch those hideous “abusers” going backdoor. If so, one would have to not only question the enforcement, but the law itself.

But even though, as I openly admit, I am a known, scum-sucking abuser with a Site Meter, your characterization of this community as having elements of obtuse, overzealous, McCarthyistic “Site Meter” crusaders is a bit over the top. I trust in the character of much of this community. I’ve only had one vocal complaint about the Site Meter, and that came from an individual of dubious scruples whom I have not a shred of respect for. I just can’t picture Epinions members cloistered in secret little chat rooms, playing some sort of “seek and destroy” game to use whatever flimsy, superficial rationale is available to “take down” individuals they dislike. Surely Epinions members, even the most vigilant cops, are not that petty and weasel-like.

Hey, Epinions could add a clause stating that it is required that all members write their reviews naked while standing on their heads (actually they already may have done so – better check that right now – then re-check tomorrow – then re-check the next day – and the next – and the next), but that doesn’t mean that anyone (or at least anyone with any strength of character) would witch hunt other writers, screaming out, “<i>HEY! Erik Kosberg wrote a review while he was naked, but he failed to stand on his head! That’s against TOS! That’s against TOS! Abuser! Abuser! Abuser! Crucify him! Crucify him!</i>” The Epinions.com TOS is not a substitute for common sense.

But then again, who knows? I’ve seen some flakey things around here, and, if Epinions members are engaging in such frivilous, moronic sabotage, I will gladly grant “express written permission” to kiss my ass.

[Sordid-1]

Rich,

I damn you 2,003 times. If you can't play nice, I will no longer tag my scribblings on your refrigerator. Then you'll be sorry.

[AuntieEmma[$]]

Originally posted by joubert

Privacy issues - although that's a stretch in my opinion

Even though I'm one of those nutty privacy freaks, I have used trackers on my personal (not Epinions) web pages. I did have some trepidations, though, in using them because of the privacy thing -- they do seem somewhat intrusive, and they gave me a lot more information than I wanted. I didn't want to know people's IP addresses!!! I just wanted to find out if they've come in from search engines or from links from other sites. Plus I had a lot of fun playing with the graphs ...

On the other end, I've made myself invisible to trackers (I think -- if I set it up right). It's not even that I care so much -- I'm on AOL, so therefore have no meaningful IP address, and I don't really care if people know how I arrived at their site. It's just that I'm so annoyed with all the information-gathering that goes on on the internet in general, that I'll take any chance I have to throw a bit of a monkey wrench in there.

One thing about sitemeters that may be relevant to their use on Epinions -- they slow down page loading because the server has to connect to the tracker site, and Epinions' page loading is already abysmally slow as it is.

[susanwhipple]

I have a question about sitemeters. If you have a firewall, is all information blocked? some?

I could probably find the info, but I'm too lazy.

[Joubert[$]]

Originally posted by AuntieEmma



One thing about sitemeters that may be relevant to their use on Epinions -- they slow down page loading because the server has to connect to the tracker site, and Epinions' page loading is already abysmally slow as it is.

That is an excellent point!

Originally posted by susanwhipple
I have a question about sitemeters. If you have a firewall, is all information blocked? some?

I could probably find the info, but I'm too lazy.

Nope. I think you have to turn off Java, but there are about two hundred computer geniuses here and me, who barely manages to burn a CD without using kerosene.

Well BUT....having a counter from Honesty doesn't slow down the page load????