Import legacy products

[milesmcc]

Type of pull request: product additions

Related issues: n/a

---

This PR brings in all of the nearly-correct product assessments from the old PrivacySpy site. All of the policies have some outstanding issue that prevented them from being merged in the original batch. (Note: all products that had no graded questions were removed.)

[doamatto]

Fixed the merge conflicts, but it appears the check is getting stuck on installing fsevents (which it can't; the check uses Linux, not macOS). It's possible npm i --no-optional might resolve the problem, but it seems to be a non-issue locally (even after cache clearning, rebuilding the lockfile, et cetera).

[doamatto]

@milesmcc You think you might know the remedy to this issue?

[milesmcc]

Taking a look at this now. Out of curiosity, what was the need for modifying package.json and adding those packages?

[milesmcc]

Tests now work @doamatto. Still a few icons that need smaller icons, though :(

[doamatto]

Taking a look at this now. Out of curiosity, what was the need for modifying package.json and adding those packages?

When I was trying to run npm test or gulp, it would throw errors saying that a module was not found with that package name. Installing the packages seemed to remove the issue and continue to build. It's possible it was just a per-case scenario, but I'm not 100% sure.

[doamatto]

Tests now work @doamatto. Still a few icons that need smaller icons, though :(

Alright, I'll manually shrink some down in a titbit to fit the criteria. Maybe we should find a way to tell ImgBot compress down to 30kB, if possible.

[doamatto]

@milesmcc I believe we are good to go 😃

[milesmcc]

Great. There are a few product labels that need improvement (ESPN, for example) but I can deal with that.

[doamatto]

Hey @milesmcc; wanted to see if you need/wanted some help with it since it's been a hot while.

[milesmcc]

Honestly, sure. Would you be able to go over the descriptions for the products and make sure that they aren't super weird? For example, right now the description for ESPN is quite corporate and sounds like it was copy-pasted right off their website. In general, we want descriptions to be informative, neutral, and useful to your average visitor. The current descriptions on the site provide a good example (in terms of both content and length).

[doamatto]

Honestly, sure. Would you be able to go over the descriptions for the products and make sure that they aren't super weird? For example, right now the description for ESPN is quite corporate and sounds like it was copy-pasted right off their website. In general, we want descriptions to be informative, neutral, and useful to your average visitor. The current descriptions on the site provide a good example (in terms of both content and length).

No problem; I'll try to get it done up by this Friday or so.

[milesmcc]

Cool, thanks! And no rush (obviously :)).

[doamatto]

@milesmcc Seems it went faster than I thought it would haha. You can check d72c02d for all the changes, as well as the git message for a more in-depth of what I did. I think it might be a smart idea to establish in the contribution guidelines that people should use non-vague or "biased" terminology when doing descriptions and contributing other content.

[doamatto]

@milesmcc Just checking to see when you reckon you might have a chance to look this PR over since it should be good to go (🤞)