From: jeffo@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (J.B. Nicholson-Owens)
Subject: Re: Avoid RightBrain (was: Re: PasteUp vs PageMaker vs Quark...)
Reply-To: jeffo@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:15:46 GMT

glenn@rightbrain.com (Glenn Reid) writes:
>My sense is that people are overreacting somewhat, but let me just say
>this in response to those of you who are advocating "Avoid RightBrain"
>or "Boycott RightBrain" or whatever:  first of all, we're not Pillsbury
>or Carnation, and a boycott is not just a nuisance, it's a big deal.

Exactly why I advocated the idea.  Perhaps then your employees would
actually pay attention to the situation at hand.

>Do
>you really think that's the right way to handle an inappropriate net
>posting, or are you just still in college?

Do you think it's a good business practice to insult potential clients?

>Please: send us mail to complain; we listen to you.

I have sent mail, and only one response was received.  It obviously didn't
make a difference because it was before Jack Reynold's posting were done.

>If you really want to drive all the NeXT developers out of business (or
>just discourage them and make them think again about the Windows port),
>it'll be YOUR machine that becomes obsolete.

I only encouraged boycotting your company.  You aren't the sole support
for the machine, therefore, only your company will go out of business.

>And one final thing: USENET is an anarchy.  There is no police force,
>barely any guidelines, and certainly no central authority.

Another reason why I took the measure I felt was necessary.

>We pay for our news feed and we obey
>the laws.

You personally and another employee of your company obviously does not
do this or else this thread would not have started.

>We have observed over time that there are approximately 10,000
>"silent" readers for every vocal poster,

Just because they might not write publicly or privately about how they
feel, they might still avoid your products.  If you or your employees
continue to post without regard to the rules for USENET (or etiquette
guidelines), you run the risk of offending even more readers and you
will definately gain more dislike by the people who actively post
against your postings.  Why be risky?

>It's important that you
>all consider this, because it means that the VOCAL FEW decide your fate,
>rather than the silent majority. 

The silent majority will go either way, or else they wouldn't be
silent.  And if they remain silent, nobody can say whether they are
for you or against you.  Again, why run the risk of making them
against you?

>A handful of people (essentially
>all of them in college, for what it's worth)

It's worth nothing.  College student dollars are just as green as
anyone else's.

>How many of you still have a copy of the comparison Jack posted?

Whether or not we save this is irrelevant to the point of whether it
was a good idea in the interest of your company to post it in the
first place.

>Jack answers a question with an RTF post and it becomes an "advertisement"

There was no question to which he responded.  He posted clearly in the
interest of RightBrain as he said in his apology.

>Anyway, I'm slightly irritated, and I apologize for my tone, but I get
[...]

And why are 19 year olds incapable of paying for their feeds?  Seems
like you are completely missing the point of why advertising is not
good on USENET.

>I have asked him to cut it out with the net postings, however.

Let's hope that he listens.  Obviously cutting off his news feed
didn't do the trick (he bragged about using your terminal to post that
ad).
-- 
-- Jeff (jeffo@uiuc.edu)
-- No NeXTmail please
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy