On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 12:20:59 -0500, you wrote:

>-- Delivered via SpamCon Foundation DEA: http://dea.spamcon.org
>-- Replies will be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>-- Additional Info: http://dea.spamcon.org/i/?v=936026
>
>I have been having a rather spirited discussion in another forum. I 
>mentioned that a couple of years ago, we began sending out quarterly news 
>letters to an affinity group (about 800 executives). I know all of these 
>people personally. I see almost all of them at least once a year and and 
>either meet or have telephone contact with  most of them far more 
>frequently. Nobody ever opted in. Nobody has ever asked to be removed. 
>While nothing is being sold, it does further the corporate image so it is 
>commercial email and it is unsolicited. Yet, I have a hard time accepting 
>that this is no different from the anonymous, untraceable mailers who want 
>to enlarge my penis, sell me Viagra or entice me to view "Three Teenage 
>Virgins, Two Goats and  a Python in the Frat House."
>
>I am amazed at the level of vitriol this inspired. Help me out here folks. 
>What do you think?

Welp, you're making what is a very common mistake. You're measuring
spam on the context of content. In that comparison, you might be
correct in saying that, because your e-mail communications are
apparently devoid of virgins, goats and frat houses (in whatever
combination one might choose), they are not spam.

The problem is this. Spam is about _consent_, not _content_. You're
the one e-mailing, they're the one receiving. If they haven't asked
for it before you sent it, you presumed consent. That is spam.

If content dictated spamminess, then prOn spam wouldn't be spam -
because somewhere, there must surely be some person who, upon
receiving the  "Three Teenage Virgins, Two Goats and  a Python in the
Frat House" spam, exclaims a shout of pure goaty-virginal glee in
thanks, because they *want* the content, therefore it isn't spam.
However, an e-bill from the phone company, which I asked for but don't
necessarily *want*, is spam? Reductio ad absurdam.

Spam is about consent, not content. Cost-shifting to the receipient
happens, no matter what the content of the mail being send and recived
is.

Hope that helps,

Ted 

_______________________________________________
spamcon-general mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.spamcon.org/mailman/listinfo/spamcon-general#subscribers
Subscribe, unsubscribe, etc: Use the URL above or send "help" in body
    of message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Contact administrator: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to