TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
You said:
In any case, if it doesn't actually work that way, fine. But it still
bothers and puzzles me that people who should know better don't see the
problem, that they think its OK to sneak code onto my computer that I
don't know about to collect information -- any information -- and send
it somewhere without my knowledge. As others have noted, it's illegal in
many places and IHMO it's unethical everywhere.
BECAUSE FEEDBACK DOESN"T SNEAK CODE ON YOUR COMPUTER.
I feel better now. ;-) (and I appreciate the "Sterling reputation" thing.
That makes me feel pretty good!)
Feedback doesn't install anything on your computer. It sends nothing
anywhere.
Every web server in the world collects basic information about other servers
that contact it - that's you visiting a web page hosted on a server. This
information is important, as it potentially allows the IT people to monitor
for DoS attacks and other stuff. (My brother has a web hosting/web design
company and when he's been hit with attacks, this info has been critical to
stop it)
Webservers collects no information that's personal to you as a person. The
server collects some basic information about the visit. You as a person
never opted in to have that info collected, it just happens when you visit a
web page.
That's how Feedback works. Nothing is installed on your computer. Nothing is
sent anywhere. It's the sort of basic reporting that all web servers do. All
of them.
sharon
Sharon Burton
MadCap Software Product Consultant
Managing your content, one topic at a time
www.anthrobytes.com
951-369-8590
IM: sharonvburton -at- yahoo -dot- com
Twitter: sharonburton
-----Original Message-----
From: techwr-l-bounces+sharon=anthrobytes -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
[mailto:techwr-l-bounces+sharon=anthrobytes -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On
Behalf Of Combs, Richard
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 8:38 AM
To: Stephen Arrants; techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Subject: RE: Follow-up to question about getting feedback from users
Stephen Arrants wrote:
> As a former user* of Madcap Feedback, it isn't what you are screaming
> about. When we used it, users were always informed about what was
being
> collected, why, and how. They were given the option to turn it off.
And
> the statistics collected were never linked to their IP address or
other
> identifiable information.
Were users always informed and given the option to turn it off because
that's how Feedback automatically works or because that's how your
company chose to implement it?
> If any of you civil libertarians had spent 5 minutes of your high
> dudgeon going to the Madcap site to look for information, you'd have
> answered your own shrill questions.
Dan Goldstein did just that and found information that appears to
contradict what you say about its behavior.
> Think about it. You're supposed to be technical communicators. You're
> supposed to search for answers, know where to look for information.
Yet
> not one of you said "That sounds bad--I'll go to the Madcap site and
> look for more information." Or "Does anyone here use Feedback? Is this
> true?" <snip>
This thread didn't start with someone complaining about how Feedback
worked -- a claim that indeed would call for further research before
being believed.
It began with a post by someone who has long represented MadCap on this
list, who has a sterling reputation, whose post started with "+++I work
part time for MadCap++++," and who touted the _benefits_ of this "phone
home" behavior. Accepting her description of how it works wasn't at all
unreasonable.
In any case, if it doesn't actually work that way, fine. But it still
bothers and puzzles me that people who should know better don't see the
problem, that they think its OK to sneak code onto my computer that I
don't know about to collect information -- any information -- and send
it somewhere without my knowledge. As others have noted, it's illegal in
many places and IHMO it's unethical everywhere.
> When are you going to complain about Google, for example, and their
> potentially insidious data collection policies Do you know what
> permissions you've given them, and what information about you they own
> as well as your own postings that they claim rights to?
You're comparing apples and bicycles. I chose to set up a Google home
page, knowing (at least in general terms; I skimmed the privacy policy)
what that meant. But I choose not to blog at Blogspot, partly because of
their claim on the content. I chose not to install Google's desktop
apps. If I did, I'd again be presented with alerts, options, and a
detailed privacy policy regarding data collection and how they use it.
MS, Adobe, and others that want to collect application crash data ask
permission to "phone home" each and every time. It's totally anonymous,
serves a useful purpose, and is to my benefit -- but they recognize that
it still requires my consent.
The behavior attributed to Feedback, OTOH, reminds me of the sneaky
stuff RealNetworks used to do that caused countless people (myself
included) to remove RealPlayer from their PCs.
Richard G. Combs
Senior Technical Writer
Polycom, Inc.
richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom
303-223-5111
------
rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom
303-777-0436
------
Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers developing Table of
Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as Doc-To-Help
2009 tips, tricks, and best practices. http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/
Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as sharon -at- anthrobytes -dot- com -dot-
Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers developing Table of
Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as Doc-To-Help
2009 tips, tricks, and best practices. http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/
Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
