- From: Vinay Goel <vigoel@adobe.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:37:31 -0700
- To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- CC: John Simpson <john@consumerwatchdog.org>, "Mike O'Neill" <michael.oneill@baycloud.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>, "rob@blaeu.com" <rob@blaeu.com>
Hi Rigo, You've just mixed the two. In my email, I state that companies cannot rely on the validity of the opt out signal. I speak nothing to the rate of DNT:1 signals in the marketplace, and I do not say that companies want to avoid a high opt out rate if that preference was indicated by the user. I suspect that companies are likely hesitant to use DNT as their opt out preference because they cannot detect/tell whether it was set by the user. -Vinay On 7/23/13 12:24 PM, "Rigo Wenning" <rigo@w3.org> wrote: >Vinay, > >it is unhelpful to mix the "who set the preference and we fear 50% DNT- >users" into each and every discussion we are having. > >I understand, you're mainly saying: the audience measurement people >don't use DNT as their opt-out because there would be too much opt out? >So you want that lower opt-out rate too. > >Apart from that, I think that John has a valid question and that in the >process we have to address that question. > > --Rigo > >On Tuesday 23 July 2013 10:57:08 Vinay Goel wrote: >> While I can't speak for the audience measurement industry, I think >> they've made it clear a few times already why they can't honor DNT:1 >> as its opt out. Specifically, the audience measurement industry (nor >> any industry, for that matter), cannot rely on the validity of who >> set DNT:1 and whether the user is truly wishing to opt out from >> audience measurement after understanding the value exchange it >> provides.
Received on Tuesday, 23 July 2013 18:38:13 UTC