"I run a Wiki. I've contributed to several Wikis run by other people."
I run three. I've also contributed to several Wikis run by other people. (the relevance of these facts to the discussion are limited, however) "If there's one thing I can tell you with *absolute* certainty, it's that links to pornographic sites -- dozens, hundreds of them -- on the front page (or the help page, or the German help page, or ...) are spam." I have two comments on this: Firstly, that would entirely depend on your definition. For instance, if you take the definition dictionary.com (and a lot of other dictionaries) use, you will get: spam: Unsolicited e-mail, often of a commercial nature, sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups; junk e-mail. By that definition, it can not be spam. Secondly, being a fellow wikirunner ;-), let's say we *would* take a more elaborate definition of spam, as is described in the wikipedia. Even then, you would me argue something I did not claim, namely that 'dozens, hundreds of links to pornographic sites' is not spam. See more about that below. "Now, I'm not saying you put porn-spam links on Wikipedia. But links can most certainly be used as a form of spam. I've seen it myself." Even that is irrelevant, because I didn't make that claim. Let's take the wikipedia-definition, which is more broad then that of dictionary.com: "Spamming is the abuse of any electronic communications medium to send unsolicited messages to someone in bulk. While its definition usually extends to any unsolicited bulk electronic communication, some exclude from the definition of the term "spam" messages considered by the receiver (or even just the sender) to be targeted, non-commercial, or wanted. " So, as we can see here also, the definition is not clear cut. for instance, my link was not of a commercial nature, so on those grounds alone, could it still be considered spam? But then again, there are some requirements that almost ALWAYS come back in the definitions of spam, namely that it is unsolicited or indiscriminate and it's send in bulk or in multitudes. Since the link was in response to a request for a quote, it was not unsollicited, thus it can not be spam. "But", you may add, "I wasn't aware that the claim you made had any bearings on 'your link' you were talking about just a moment before, and I took it as a claim on its own." Well, even then you would be wrong, because 'a link' is not plural, thus, it's not a multitude, nor 'bulk', ergo, it doesn't fall under the definition of spam. (That is, even if it would fall under all the other necessary requirements to be called spam). "(Be careful when you use words like "can't" or "never" or "always". They usually turn around and bite you.)" I am careful, but that doesn't help against comments that counter-argue a claim I didn't make. Of course, these sort of arguments are pretty superfluous, because, if you happend to miss the connection with 'a link' in the original post; that means: a link *like that* (which I just described). Just to keep the discussion on track. _______________________________________________ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
