Searching \ for 'O.T. - what's less interesting, spam haters or spa' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=whats+less+interesting
Search entire site for: 'O.T. - what's less interesting, spam haters or spa'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'O.T. - what's less interesting, spam haters or spa'
1998\03\01@161506 by mbringer

flavicon
face
[]  > BUT WHEN THEY ADVERTISE IT OR PUT LINKS TO IT WHERE THEY ARE NOT
SOLICITED OR
[]  > WANTED  THEY SHOULD BE DEALT WITH SEVERELY.

Personally I get no more than 3-4 unsolicited "spam" e-mails per day. The
number of off-topic messages on this mailing list is much greater than that,
and the off-topic messages are also even less interesting than what the spam
usually is. I therefore think that people like you are ten times as much of a
problem as the spammers are (but both are of course problems).

[]  > like these and ESPECIALLY ON YOUTH ORIENTED NEWS GROUPS AND ANY THAT DO
NOT
[]  > PERTAIN TO PORN.

The nature of the problem is obviously that the unsolicited messages take up
space, makes the user think he got an interesting personal mail when it in fact
shows to be bulk mail, and that he needs to press "delete" an undesired number
of times per day. Not that porn is dangerous if "youth" sees it.

[]  > I would appreciate comments or suggestions on how to stop these indivi
dual be
[]  > sent to me privately and not on the piclist.

Why not go one step further - don't just attack spam, but attack everything
that is bad for the same reason as spam is bad. I.e. people's tendency of
writing uninteresting messages and sending it to recipients who are not
interested. Profit is one reason that people send unwanted messages to others,
but ignorance is a far more common cause of sending messages which are of no
interest to the recipient.

Finally, who is the list manager, and would he please unsubscribe me manually
from this unsubscribable mailing list? (I'm subscribed as spam_OUTglennTakeThisOuTspamtripnet.se)

1998\03\01@184405 by Sean Breheny

face picon face
At 10:04 PM 3/1/98 +0100, you wrote:
>[]  > BUT WHEN THEY ADVERTISE IT OR PUT LINKS TO IT WHERE THEY ARE NOT
>SOLICITED OR
>[]  > WANTED  THEY SHOULD BE DEALT WITH SEVERELY.
>
>Personally I get no more than 3-4 unsolicited "spam" e-mails per day. The
>number of off-topic messages on this mailing list is much greater than that,
>and the off-topic messages are also even less interesting than what the spam
>usually is. I therefore think that people like you are ten times as much of a
>problem as the spammers are (but both are of course problems).
>

I don't get it, someone who is calling attention to the problem of spam is
to blame for spam?

>[]  > like these and ESPECIALLY ON YOUTH ORIENTED NEWS GROUPS AND ANY THAT DO
>NOT
>[]  > PERTAIN TO PORN.
>
>The nature of the problem is obviously that the unsolicited messages take up
>space, makes the user think he got an interesting personal mail when it in
fact
>shows to be bulk mail, and that he needs to press "delete" an undesired
number
>of times per day. Not that porn is dangerous if "youth" sees it.
>

Well, I think (hope) most parents would be concerned about their teenage
sons/daughters looking at porn. It has always been the spirit in
tehcnically minded circles (such as amateur radio, for example) that
objectionable material should not be allowed into the discussion so that
young people (or anyone who finds such material objectionable) would be
able to fully participate in the discussion.

Besides, if we didn't have people who fought spam, lists like these might
not be possible (due to huge amounts of spam).

Sorry for taking up the bandwidth, I just thought that it was an important
point.


Sean





+--------------------------------+
| Sean Breheny                   |
| Amateur Radio Callsign: KA3YXM |
| Electrical Engineering Student |
+--------------------------------+
Fight injustice, please look at
http://homepages.enterprise.net/toolan/joanandrews/

Personal page: http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/shb7
.....shb7KILLspamspam@spam@cornell.edu
Phone(USA): (607) 253-0315

1998\03\02@081147 by mbringer

flavicon
face
[]  > >Personally I get no more than 3-4 unsolicited "spam" e-mails per day.
The
[]  > >number of off-topic messages on this mailing list is much greater than
that,
[]  > >and the off-topic messages are also even less interesting than what the
spam
[]  > >usually is. I therefore think that people like you are ten times as much
of a
[]  > >problem as the spammers are (but both are of course problems).

[]  > I don't get it, someone who is calling attention to the problem of spam
is
[]  > to blame for spam?

No, spam messages are to blame because they are (most of the times) unwanted.
Unwanted spam-hating messages are also to blame because they are also unwanted.
Few people are interested in reading that person x (whom they are not familiar
with) hates spam. And few people are interested in "how to make a fortune in
900 numbers" or "free xxx pics" etc.
So I say - stop sending uninteresting messages, regardless of whether they are
sent for profit ("spam") or because the author is so self-centered that he
needs to tell all the microcontroller people that he hates spam.

>  > Not that porn is dangerous if "youth" sees it.

[]  > Well, I think (hope) most parents would be concerned about their teenage
[]  > sons/daughters looking at porn.

Maybe in islamic countries, isolated communist countries (such as China, North
Corea or Burma), and in some ultra-religious sects (such as the Amish areas in
the USA) they still believe that it is dangerous if a teenager looks at a
picture made to stimulate the sexuality of the viewer. But in most parts of the
world, people have realized that sex or pornographic pictures, are not
dangerous. I would be more concerned if my teenager was completely uninterested
in the opposite sex.

Greetings,
Glenn
Sweden

1998\03\03@095813 by rlunn

flavicon
face
S.H.S. wrote:

> <snip>
>
> I would be more concerned if my teenager was completely
> uninterested in the opposite sex.

   Why?

___Bob

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1998 , 1999 only
- Today
- New search...