To: "Dave Beightol" <dave@infodave.com> From: Dave Voorhis <sysadmin@armchair.mb.ca> Subject: Re: This is a legitimate Offer... At 11:30 PM 1/22/98 -0500, you wrote: >>You think a mere wording change would change the nature of your email? >>That's like thinking that painting "Truck" on a bicycle would give it four >>wheels... > >From what I read, as long as it was a legit offer and you gave a legit >return address it was cool.. If I might ask, what document implied that a mere wording change would turn spam into non-spam? Was it, perhaps, something from the organization that sold you the mailing list? While many spamsters do hide their identity for obvious reasons, I've never seen anything that suggested spam wasn't spam merely because of a change in content. >>Again, I am amazed that one who claims to have an "online life" would not >>realize the folly of sending unsolicited commercial email. > >Why? I have been getting it myself for 2 years.. sometimes daily.. If I >don't like it (and sometimes I do,) I just click the delete button, It's not >that hard... Well, as I'll state later in this message, it's not the difficulty in pressing the delete key that's the problem. The problem is the cost. >>Let me ask you this: Have you received even ONE legitimate order from >this? > >Yes, 2 actually, still not worth the price I payed thought.. That really sums things up, doesn't it? >>>I have not soliceted your services.. >> >>In court, I would argue otherwise. I would argue that you implicitly >>solicited my services by sending off-topic email to mailing lists at my >>site. You implicitly solicited my services by putting the burden of cost >>for distributing YOUR commercial mail on ME. [...] > >In court in this country you would not have a chance... Really? Then I think you might find it enlightening to see http://www.jmls.edu/cyber/cases/spam.html >>Furthermore, had you done your research, you would have known that I >>explicitly make it known that there are costs for distributing unsolicited >>commercial email. Please see the link at the bottom of >>http://www.armchair.mb.ca/ > >I have never been to armchair.. Ignorance is no excuse. >I had no idea it was a mailing list.. I thought I was sending to individual >addresses. Ignorance is no excuse. Do you understand that the problem with spam is that ALL of the responsibility and cost is placed on EVERYONE ELSE but you? That's why it's so popular, AND why it's so insidious. It is as if you send out a bulk mailing of brochures, but instead of paying the post office to distribute them, the mail carriers themselves had to pay to deliver them. Would that be fair? >It does not cost to recieve email. Wrong. Do you think the Internet is free? The key issues are bandwidth and administration. If enough of my bandwidth is consumed with spam, or if enough of the time I spend administering the system is occupied with spam, then I will need to upgrade my system, or spend more on administration, in order to handle the load of spam in addition to the intended uses of my system. That means YOUR spam costs ME without any compensation. Is that fair? Also, some sites pay for their Internet access by volume. Every byte received or transmitted costs money. Is it fair for such sites to PAY to deliver your advertisements, and receive no compensation from you? Finally, many individuals pay for long distance charges or volume charges (this is especially true outside of North America) for their Internet access. Is it fair for them to PAY for every piece of spam they receive? >>Well, if there is a positive to this, it is that maybe some would-be >>spamsters will learn something. I intend to turn this exchange (suitably >>anonymized) into a Web page, to warn other would-be distributors of >>unsolicted commercial email of what WILL happen if they try it. > >See that it IS anonymized or you will find out about the court system in >this country.. Now why would you threaten me? Especially since you have no legal basis for doing so? I have treated you with courtesy, when I _should_ be pursuing you for my costs. Anonymity is an act of courtesy, not a legal necessity, because you already made public in your spam, any information that we've shared privately. Now I'm not so sure anonymity is a good idea...
Of course, there's more...