On 4 Nov 2005 at 8:08, G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Nov 2005 13:20:15 -0600, Mary Leete wrote:
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > Congratulations to all who worked on OOo 2.0! It's fabulous!
> >
> > If anyone is looking for a great manual, Free Software For Dummies,
> > includes about 200 pages on OpenOffice.org 2.0. It's newly published
> > and
> > received excellent reviews in the Chicago Tribune, LA Times and
> > elsewhere. It has several chapters on all the major programs:
> > Writer, Calc, Base, Draw, and Impress, plus it includes other free
> > software as well, such as The GIMP, Firefox, and more. And it only
> > costs $14.95 on Amazon. Please spread the word!
> >
> > Congratulations again on your success!
> >
> > Mary Leete
> > Author of Free Software For Dummies
> >
>
> Mary,
>
> THIS IS SPAM.
This is not spam.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
"Spamming is the use of any electronic communications medium to send
unsolicited messages in
bulk."
This message was not sent in bulk. It congratulates everyone who worked on OOo
2.0 and
announces her book which will be useful in spreading awareness and use of OOo.
Another definition from Wikipedia.
"Newsgroup spam predates e-mail spam, and targets Usenet newsgroups. Old
Usenet
convention defines spamming as excessive multiple posting, that is, the
repeated posting of a
message (or substantially similar messages)."
It seems you have posted this message on multiple lists. I have seen three
copies of it on the
User's list. Do you consider this SPAM?
> Legitimate authors do NOT need to spam mailing lists to generate
> sales. They help on the list. Unlike real authors, such as Andrew
> Pitonyak and Jean Hollis Weber, who help on this list, you have not
> bothered. In fact this is the sole message in the list(s) archives.
> One message, really.
You are implying that legitimate authors only work for free. I could make an
equally asinine
statement that the only authors who work for free are not good enough to get
published.
> Your subject is misleading in that it implies that yours is the only
> manual. Not so, the Documentation project and OOoAuthors group,
> already have manuals available and for FREE in softcopy and at a
> reasonable cost for printed.
I see no reason to assume that stating that a manual is available implies that
it is the only
manual available. $79.99 US is not reasonable, especially since it DOES NOT
cover OOo 2.0.
I have found the pdf manuals useful and would highly recommend them. I would
also
recommend looking at "Free Software For Dummies".
> In conclusion, I see that you and maybe some others think that by
> abusing the OOo mailings lists for a personal profit is okay, I do
> not.
I do not see any abuse.
Perhaps you should step back and realize that your Documentation project isn't
the only source
of information on OOo.
> I think that if you read your terms of service agreement with your ISP
> you will find that you have made a mistake. I will bet that your
> publisher will also not be happy.
>
> Enjoy your profits.
> --
> Documentation Co-lead
> "Dinna meddle wi' things ye ken nuthin' aboot!"
> J.H.
>
- -
Larry I. Gusaas,
Moose Jaw, Sask.
http://larry-gusaas.com
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0544-7, 11/03/2005
Tested on: 11/4/05 12:23:52 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
