ARB's dashboard

A comment on the idea "Would rather keep Foxmarks as-is" in Xmarks:

Craig;

No, I no longer use Foxmarks/Xmarks at all as it can no longer be trusted to perform it's key functions, among which is private server usage. Any data that was retained by the use of this addon has been purged, any data that refuses to die on Foxmarks/Xmarks server(s) is being monitored. Repeated problems and the incidents with data corruption and 'accidental' mixups only confirm the concerns I and others have raised. It is the end of the line for this extension.
SyncPlaces I have not tried, but might in future.
Since the release of Firefox 3.5.x Mozilla Weave is being given the chance to earn it's spurs with a large set of dummy data. So far this simplistic addon has performed well, it's simplicity is very much welcomed. As for privacy, Weave requires encryption to operate, and Mozilla itself being under a much higher, much stricter form of scrutiny also helps.

And yes, it has been 4 months since my original posting on GetSatisfaction.com; but aside from one or two users actually bothering to search the site and ending up here, there is only silence. – ARB, on August 16, 2009 09:48

A comment on the idea "Would rather keep Foxmarks as-is" in Xmarks:

You can decide for yourself if you wish, I know how I feel about it but cannot decide for others; though one could venture the opinion that when a piece of software is created/maintained by several people as a 'team', then some of the behaviour exhibited towards end users, in particular in response to queries of concern, can be labeled as intentional deception.
Via my profile and that of thatmtnman you can view several questions and replies that have been exchanged already regarding several concerns; in particular some of the questions that have never been answered by the team. – ARB, on August 05, 2009 22:46

A comment on the idea "Would rather keep Foxmarks as-is" in Xmarks:

Better late than never some might say, but where privacy and security is concerned there is nothing worse than 'later' as it always leads to 'never'; with obvious disastrous life-long results. Look at Twitter, Facebook, etc.
Ah, even the much used argument of 'Amazon does it too' by the Foxmarks/Xmarks team, is now coming back to bite them after the recent incident with Kindle, how ironic could it be that the application once loved now doubted has had it's own share of messing with user data. Have you read the reports of users who had their data replaced by that of another user, for example? quite the excitement.

'Positive progress' is, by contrast of previous wrongdoings, highly irrelevant. User be warned. – ARB, on August 05, 2009 20:33

A comment on the question "Can I keep all of my bookmarks private?" in Xmarks:

thatmtnman,

You may find this interesting. It is clear that preservation of 'privacy' is high on the agenda in Europe.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/...

Setting precedence in these matters will only be a matter of time. – ARB, on June 18, 2009 13:18

A comment on the question "Can I keep all of my bookmarks private?" in Xmarks:

thatmtnman,

Yes it has, pardon the delay for life has many tasks for me. I have been observing this space from a distance, and your own observations of the evasive behaviour displayed by the team is correct, "Wilful Blindness" is indeed the case.
You may also observe that their designated area on Mozilla's site has been gathering negative comments, not just because of the team's unashamed hijacking of their previous good ranking by merely changing the name on their old listing as other (also former) users over at Mozilla have rightfully pointed out.
You are not alone in your opinion, the facts are on the table and they have not been refuted, so they stand and we leave. The new plugin you mention is not unknown to me and will find it's rightful place very soon. – ARB, on June 05, 2009 14:16

A comment on the question "Can I keep all of my bookmarks private?" in Xmarks:

thatmtnman,

Perhaps I have missed the point, I have realised that they got what they wanted very early on, but I was delusional to think that there were intelligent beings living in that team that could be reasoned with. So yes, the final conclusions have been drawn now. Quite disappointing really. – ARB, on June 02, 2009 09:06

ARB replied on June 02, 2009 07:24 to the question "Security of contributing bookmarks" in Xmarks:

Eric, you may be interested in some of the questions asked by other people. You should be able to locate them by following the link under my username here, alternatively you can look for topics raised 30 to 40 days earlier by thatmtnman, myself and several other people.

ARB started following the question "Security of contributing bookmarks" in Xmarks.

ARB marked one of thatmtnman's replies in Xmarks as useful. thatmtnman replied to the question "Can I keep all of my bookmarks private?".

A comment on the question "Can I keep all of my bookmarks private?" in Xmarks:

Eric, again you avoid the issue.
"Nowhere have I seen us explicitly refuse to answer a question." is exactly the problem, you haven't! because you never bother to dignify a question with an answer that isn't evasive; 'explicitly refuse to answer a question' leads nowhere, Did you or did you not properly answer the question(s) asked?.
You certainly haven't answered my questions at all, nor have you answered thatmtnman's questions. Instead however you go right ahead and insult the intelligence of your audience.
So 'in other words' as you like to say. Thanks but no thanks Eric, with all due respect for what hard work might have been done, i've had quite enough of the attitude here already. If you can't be bothered to go back a page and actually read and fully comprehend what all these people here have written to you on your little corner of 'Get Satisfaction', you can forget about having it repeated to you, and you can forget about gaining back the trust and respect you lost when you started this childish game of smoke screen tactics. – ARB, on May 07, 2009 11:16

ARB marked one of thatmtnman's replies in Xmarks as useful. thatmtnman replied to the question "Can I keep all of my bookmarks private?".

A comment on the question "Can I keep all of my bookmarks private?" in Xmarks:

You forget that Google is a big corporate organisation, has already been abused multiple times and also brought before justice multiple times in the past, and is constantly hounded by security and privacy watchdog organisations.
At least Google will communicate when asked to do so. The Foxmarks/Xmarks team is not communicating at all. – ARB, on April 24, 2009 10:07

A comment on the question "Can I keep all of my bookmarks private?" in Xmarks:

Well said John. – ARB, on April 24, 2009 09:48

A comment on the question "Can I keep all of my bookmarks private?" in Xmarks:

" Eric, (Official Rep), commented 1 day ago
Sorry to see you go, James. I'm not sure where thatmtnman has seen us explicitly refuse to answer any questions, but the issue you describe is something we've addressed in several other places, if I understand your comment correctly."
--
Not sure about what exactly? or are you just selectively blind to the questions that have been asked? The lack of valid answers is highly disturbing to say the least. – ARB, on April 24, 2009 09:16

ARB marked one of James' replies in Xmarks as useful. James replied to the question "Can I keep all of my bookmarks private?".

A comment on the idea "Would rather keep Foxmarks as-is" in Xmarks:

You're welcome Craig. That is the point of the matter; understanding. So far we have received little information from the Foxmarks/Xmarks team to go by. – ARB, on April 18, 2009 11:18

A comment on the idea "Would rather keep Foxmarks as-is" in Xmarks:

You may wish to review your own behaviour first before commenting on that of others, Anony. – ARB, on April 18, 2009 11:16

A comment on the idea "Would rather keep Foxmarks as-is" in Xmarks:

Forcen, if you wish to be very specific about details; while that (only being shown the TOS when registering an account) is a possibility, you must consider most users do not go out of their way to set up their own server (either because they won't or can't for some reason), and then end up not being warned explicitly about the data mining parts of Foxmarks/Xmarks.
You could argue it was their own choice not to be warned by choosing which way to go, but that would be a balloon filled with water waiting to be popped by someone with more in-depth legal knowledge when it comes to possible data mining. – ARB, on April 18, 2009 11:04

A comment on the idea "Would rather keep Foxmarks as-is" in Xmarks:

Sorry, I cannot answer your question appropriately for your location. When I speak of 'there are still laws that have to be obeyed' I mean this in a general sense, and I have used the European Union as an example once before in another comment to bring to attention the fact no questions regarding the legality of the new services have been answered appropriately by the Foxmarks/Xmarks team, and that their often used reply of 'please read our privacy policy' simply is not an answer, as EU law will still apply.
You will have to consult a lawyer specialised in privacy law and electronic communication whom is local to your country and/or state to receive proper briefing on applicable law.
In the European Union laws regarding 'opt-in', 'opt-out', 'permission marketing', 'data retention', 'data privacy', 'privacy' and 'privacy policy' (and changes in privacy policies and business operations) have blanket laws and directives that hang over the entire union, but each member state can have different laws which can add or subtract weight from the global laws and directives.
These specific topics will exist in your country, but I cannot answer on the laws and directives associated to them specific to your country, so you will have to contact a local authority. – ARB, on April 16, 2009 09:42

A comment on the idea "Would rather keep Foxmarks as-is" in Xmarks:

Allowing an individual to click through an installer without explicitly warning them about the privacy policy and the sections therein regarding the fact that their data will be aggregated and shared by default does not constitute permission to aggregate and share the data of that individual. – ARB, on April 16, 2009 07:13