At 07:20 PM 7/20/2001, Marshall T. Rose wrote:
>hi. we're not talking about a "mail list" so the issue of "opt-in/out" is
>meaningless.
the fact that addressees are derived incrementally, rather than causing a
"mass" mailing strikes me as a minor point. The mass aspects of spam are
irritating, but not what causes the bulk of public concern.
Spam is most typically defined as unsolicited commercial email. By that
definition, the mailing in question qualifies. And it is entirely opt-out
based, since the recipient has no choice about receiving the initial mailing.
>there is only one thing that calling this "spam" achieves -- it reduces the
>impact of the term "spam". when a word means all things, it means nothing.
for all that, I agree we need to be very careful about definitions and
usage. In fact, one might wish to have codification?
d/
----------
Dave Crocker <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464
