Stephanie wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Right now it's not a big deal. But if I got 1000 such requests a day
> > from sites that were PAML copycats and listed me without my request?
> > I dunno, I might feel different.
>
> That's something I fret about, you know. :-/ But are people doing
> it for altruistic reasons like me, or are they just trying to improve
> the popularity of their sites? Does the intent really even matter?
I don't think intent really matters. The use of resources occurs the
same for a chain letter that promises money as one that promisses good
will. The intent doesn't matter there, only the effect.
> Hard to say. If I had to estimate, I'd have to say as much as
> one-third of the database is unsolicited. However, I get spontaneous
> requests to update from people whose lists fall into the unsolicited
> catagory, so people are finding out. Of the unsolicited lists, I
> only do that with Majordomo, LISTSERV and ListProc lists, so I
> never have to bug the list owner about it later on.
>
> Do lists gleaned from NEW-LIST count as unsolicited?
I'd say yes, BUT, and it's a big but, I see your listing sites that
have clearly made themselves public similar to search engines listing
websites. (Remember, one of Spamford's arguments was that merely
posting your email address on usenet solicited mail). Publicising a
list only solicites email requests to join, no other email). It does
make it public information available to journalists and (web)
publishers, however. The web publishers rights and responsibilities
would be similar to a print publishers rights and responsibilities in
printing, say, club and social group listings.
It starts to get sticky when one adds mailto links or interfaces that
make it easy to generate mail. Merely listing a list that has made
itself public is A-OK in my opinion. And now that I consider it OK to
verify public information or request republication of public but
copyrighted information, I think it is also OK for you to email list
owners that haven't contacted you. It would be like, say Yahoo
emailing me and asking if I wanted descriptive text with my listing (I
do, damnit, but can't get it currently, and I'd jump for joy if I got
such email). And just as people with websites often wish the search
engines would list them, they will also go out of their way to get
added. Similar to what you see with list owners coming to you with
requests to be added.
Calling web-stuff "spam" is a bit absurd, the whole reason that spam
is despised and legislated against is that it uses another resources
without pay. Web listings of lists do not. Unconsensual listings may
be annoying, but they are not done at the monetary expense of list
owners. That doesn't mean that the listing service shouldn't consider
these issues of consent and the like, just that it's a different issue
than spam.
The mailto and web forms that generate mail are a gray area because
they increase the likelihood of mail to the list and list-owner, which
is a cost the list owner bears. The list owner may well feel that
their own methods of promotion are best at generating that source of
mail and that others' attempts result in subscribers that are more
hassle and expense than they want. But subscription requests were
publicly solicited somewhere in most cases, so it's not spam, it's
something else.
--
Michelle Dick [EMAIL PROTECTED] East Palo Alto, CA
Owner, FATFREE Vegetarian Mailing List
