- From: Shane M Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 10:38:49 +0000
- To: Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Walter, Then we disagree on the merits here. Removing frequency-capping will have fairly negative repercussions on users seeing the same ads over-and-over-and-over driving them to turn off DNT. The group on both sides agreed to this carve-out long ago due to the perverse disincentives created in this scenario (I believe only 2 or 3 people out of ~70 ever had an issue here). Your technical solution is simply unworkable. Looking forward to the Call for Objections. - Shane -----Original Message----- From: Walter van Holst [mailto:walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl] Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 3:30 AM To: public-tracking@w3.org Subject: RE: Remove profiling prohibition for frequency capping (ISSUE-236) On 2014-09-11 12:18, Shane M Wiley wrote: > We've always agreed the frequency-capping would be a permitted use in > situations where a DNT=1 is received. Are you suggesting we now > remove that permitted use or are you simply commenting on this > specific language? I am perfectly fine with frequency-capping, as long as it doesn't require profiling at an individual level. It cannot result in collection of data by a third-party if the UA is setting a DNT:1 flag. The mere fact that this particular purpose of tracking is beneficial both to the user and the advertiser does not justify in itself an override of a DNT:1 preference. And I can think of several methods to prevent saturation of a particular user with a particular ad, for example progressively dropping least-significant bits of IP-addresses to mask out groups of users that an ad should not be shown to. I do not recall a broad consensus about this particular permitted use. Regards, Walter
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2014 10:39:37 UTC