Hi, Folks...I am forwarding this on fyi...I believe you all should be aware of this. I don't have these boards incorporated into the Polk and Bradley TNGenWeb sites, but since they do have some information that pertains to these counties, and, if you do use them, I felt you should know the following, and make your own decision on usage. You can remove these cookies by going to the browser properties and opening the files, and deleting whatever you choose. If you have more questions please contact me. Cathy Hall cat5hall@email.msn.com ASC TNGenWeb http://www.tngenweb.org/ Bradley County TNGenWeb http://www.tngenweb.org/bradley Polk County TNGenWeb http://www.tngenweb.org/polk Subject: USGW-CC-L: RE: Accessing Ancestry and Surname Boards === > >I think everyone should understand a little about what is being > >required for you to access the former RootsWeb and now Ancestry > >message boards. We should all understand what we are doing. > > > >Ancestry requires 11 cookies (excessive for any web site) to be > >placed on your computer before you can access their home page. >You > >may decline these 11 if you have your browser set to ask you > >first. You will be asked to accept another 11 if you click on the > >Message Boards link that takes you to the Message Board home >page. > >If you decline those, you will NOT be permitted to access the > >Message Boards. (That means any of your list/board users who have > >their computers set to reject cookies will not be able to use the > >boards-PERIOD). You do have the option to set your browser to > >accept only per-session cookies, which will eliminate SOME of the > >advertiser tracking. > > > >Some of the cookies Ancestry uses involve your userid (dated to > >stay on your computer until Dec 31, 2020), others are coded to be > >removed from your computer at the end of your session on the web > >site. BUT, at the present, Ancestry uses two of the major >Internet > >advertising agencies to track consumer preferences, and there are > >some major problems here: > > > >1) Ancestry uses DoubleClick and AdForce to track and customize > >their advertising. Both these companies plant a cookie in your > >computer that generally stays for years and tracks you (generally > >by code number, not name) anywhere on the internet where their > >company handles placing ads. They compile a cumulative profile on > >each individual user. On any of those sites, DoubleClick will >know > >it is you (personally) every click of the way. > > > >2) Because of pressure from public outcry and the Government, >both > >of these companies have adopted policies where you can opt out of > >having a tracking cookie by having it replaced with a "dummy" > >cookie. They advise all companies who use their advertising to >let > >their consumers know they use the company to track their > >advertising trends, that the consumer can opt out of being > >tracked, and advise the company to attach a link to the > >advertising company's Privacy Policy page where consumers can opt > >out. Ancestry has chosen not to do this at this time. I don't >know > >whether this is a conscious choice or oversight. > > > >3) There are some major problems with the potential for abuse by > >these companies. Please read the CNET news article on DoubleClick > >below. > > > >I urge everyone to let your posters know if they use Ancestry as > >it is now, they are being tracked with all it's inherent dangers > >(educate yourselves at TopClick.com). Also, those users who do >not > >permit cookies to be installed into their computers are being > >turned away at the doors, just as when the policy was that you > >MUST log in to use the boards. This is a rare policy on the > >internet, especially for the type of service Ancestry provides. > > > >It's time to ask loudly for more changes. They listened on the > >log-in issue, maybe they will on this one also. You can make your > >feelings known by sending an e-mail to webmaster@rootsweb.com. > >Make the first word of your subject line: LISTEN and it will get > >delivered to administration who makes the decisions. I'm not > >trying to stir up trouble here or badmouth Ancestry. I'm going to > >give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they haven't > >looked at all sides of this issue and are willing to listen to > >what we, their volunteer leadership, have to say. I have sent a > >personal appeal to the webmaster and am copying them on this post > >also. > > > >--Sheryl Neal Slaughter > > > >Here are excerpts from an article from CNET News.com on > >DoubleClick: > > > >----------------------------------------------------------------- >- > >--------- > >DoubleClick seeks input on new policy > >By Stefanie Olsen > >Staff Writer, CNET News.com > >June 4, 2001, 4:35 p.m. PT > > > >New York-based DoubleClick, the Web's biggest advertising and ad > >technology company, posted its new privacy policy last week.... > >With the new policy, DoubleClick does not promise to change any >of > >the practices that have drawn barbs from consumer advocates such > >as a controversial requirement that consumers "opt out" of its > >programs to avoid having data collected. But the policy does >spell > >out more clearly how it collects consumer data and what it does > >with that information. ... > > > >DoubleClick has been in the hot seat for privacy issues for >nearly > >a year and a half following its acquisition of Abacus Direct, an > >offline marketing company. Privacy advocates started to bite >their > >nails after the company announced plans to merge offline consumer > >profiles with data about online surfing habits. The proposal > >touched off a flurry of media attention and scrutiny from > >lawmakers about profiling practices on the Web.... > >Despite the controversy, DoubleClick has said that it plans to > >launch an anonymous customer profile service, which would gather > >data about Web surfers and match it to offline data from Abacus. > > > >Polonetsky said the company has received hundreds of responses to > >its new policy since it was posted Friday... One of the most > >barbed responses came in the form of an open letter from >anti-spam > >group Junkbusters. In the letter, Junkbusters President Jason > >Catlett dismissed the DoubleClick's claims of openness as > >propaganda. > > > >"I have repeatedly asked DoubleClick to show the 88 million > >Americans what is kept in Doubleclick's Abacus Direct database > >about them, and I have met with repeated refusal," according to > >Catlett's objections contained in the letter. > > > >"How could keeping billions of records in secret electronic > >dossiers constitute executing business in 'the most open manner > >possible?'" > > > >In the letter, Catlett asks for several revisions to the policy, > >including that DoubleClick obtain consumer consent before > >collecting data on an individual, or getting consumers to "opt > >in." He also asks that DoubleClick give consumers access to the > >data and the right to delete anything they so choose. > > > >DoubleClick's new policy outlines practices in its revamped >e-mail > >marketing business, which after two acquisitions, is the largest > >in the industry. The policy also tells consumers how they can opt > >out of being tracked by cookies and how not to receive catalogs > >from Abacus. In addition, it gives consumers an idea of what a > >marketing profile looks like, but does not give access to those > >profiles. > > > >Richard Smith, chief technology officer of the nonprofit Privacy > >Foundation, said that he is still reviewing the policy but that >it > >"appears to be much more thorough than the older one." However, > >Smith said he "fundamentally disagrees" with the consumers having > >to opt out of data gathering practices by Internet companies. > > > >"If you're snooping on people, you've got to let them know," >Smith > >said. The Privacy Foundation and DoubleClick "will have to agree > >to disagree" on their opt-out policy, he said.