Skip to content

updating britepool docs - #2574

Closed
bansawbanchee wants to merge 1 commit into
prebid:masterfrom
britepool:update-britepool-docs
Closed

updating britepool docs#2574
bansawbanchee wants to merge 1 commit into
prebid:masterfrom
britepool:update-britepool-docs

Conversation

@bansawbanchee

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Updating BritePool user id module description


BritePool ID, provided by [BritePool](https://britepool.com) is a Universal Identity resolution which does not depend on 3rd party cookies.
The [BritePool]((https://britepool.com)) ID is a persistent identifier that enables identity resolution for people-based marketing in the cookieless world. Every BritePool ID is associated with a real identity. As a result, publishers, SSP's and DSP's that integrate with BritePool, or automated
integration partners (such as PubMatic), are able to maximize revenues without cookies. As addressable individuals visit publisher websites and mobile apps, the BritePool IDs associated with these identities are passed into the bidstream; enabling advertisers to transact against these BritePool ID's and publishers to maximize the revenues associated with their inventory and audience. Unlike other universal identity solutions, the BritePool ID combines consumer privacy with easy, rapid integration for publishers and does not significantly increase the computing resources required of DSPs and SSPs.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please drop the sales pitch language here: "Unlike other universal identity solutions" -- Prebid cannot verify that other solutions don't also offer these features.

@bretg

bretg commented Feb 17, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@bansawbanchee - ping.

@MartianTribe

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Hi, we cannot merge your docs into our doc set as there are changes pending. Could you either make the changes or cancel this PR, it is over 3 months old. Thanks.

@bretg

bretg commented Mar 3, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I just fixed this myself by dropping the objectionable clause in a separate PR #2735 . Closing this one.

@bretg bretg closed this Mar 3, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants