Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 18:01:43 06/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 28, 2002 at 18:49:37, Robin Smith wrote: >On June 28, 2002 at 13:57:11, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>Man, it is not getting through to you, is it? >>Look here, just below: >> >>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?237855 >> >>and here: >>http://spam.abuse.net/overview/whatisspam.shtml >> >>it is spam, get it? > >The ICD e-mail does not fit the description of spam given on the site you >mention above! Why do you provide a site link that undermines your contention >that the ICD e-mail was spam? Did you even read it? Yes I did, and it does fit. >Here are some quotes from the site you mention: >"Spam is flooding the Internet with many copies of the same message" > >ICD did not "flood the Internet", it was a message about computer chess, >targeted exclusively towards computer chess enthusiasts. And it was sent to a >privately developed mailing list of SOME of those entusiasts. So the ICD e-mail >fails the "flood the internet" criteria for being spam. this is flooding, you don't have to send a billion to be flooding. many identical copies indicates the mail was not targeted for individual persons but had the character of spam. >"Most spam is commercial advertising, often for dubious products, get-rich-quick >schemes, or quasi-legal services." > >While the ICD message was commercial advertising, it matches NONE of the other >mentioned criteria such as dubious products, etc. In fact the commercial nature >of the e-mail was the ONLY aspect that fits any parts of the description of >spam. Dubious is free to interpretation, any product adverticed in an email sent to hundreds of people I see as dubious. >But please note, the site you quote does NOT say that all commercial >e-mails are spam, in fact it clearly indicates that e-mail must be more than >merely commercial to be spam. No, they need not have anything to do with commercial products, though they most often do. "Spam is flooding the Internet with many copies of the same message, in an attempt to force the message on people who would not otherwise choose to receive it." >The ICD e-mail doesn't fit this "type" of spam at all. Those are logical ORs not ANDs :) If it fits one of them it is spam. >"Email spam targets individual users with direct mail messages. Email spam lists >are often created by scanning Usenet postings, stealing Internet mailing lists, >or searching the Web for addresses." > >This is tiny bit closer, but still does not match. ICD did not scan Usenet, did >not steal mailing lists, did not search the web. It is their own private >mailing list, which they created at great time and expense on their part, and >which is not shared with anyone else. And if you don't want to be on this >mailing list, unsubscribe, as you can with any other respectable commercial >mailing list. > >I just don't understand how you can equate an e-mail targeted directly towards a >very limited group of people that clearly have a HIGH probability of being >interested in the content of the e-mail, as being spam. Because high probability or not, it is not relevant to the definition of spam. Spammers often try to target their spam to the users they feel are most probably costumers, it is still spam. > Commercial e-mail is >not == spam. For an e-mail to be spam it generally will be (based on reading >the site link *you* provided): 1) commercial, 2) sent to a very broad >distribution at low cost to the sender and 3) unlikely to be of interest to the >vast majority of recipients. But the commercial nature of ICD's e-mail >(criteria #1) is the ONLY thing that matches the description of spam on the site >you mentioned. > >My ONLY regret with the ICD e-mail is that for me it came one day too late, as I >had just placed an order the day before. I have a question. Do you think that >ANY e-mail list that is for commercial purposes is automatically spam? If not, >then what commercial e-mail lists are NOT spam? > >>The rest of your mail is not worth my time... > >If someone sees things differently from you, their mail is not worth your time? >What a bland world this would be if everyone agreed with everyone else. In the >mean time, I think you should unsubscribe from ICD's e-mail list. Personally I >plan to keep getting their "spam". I just hope the next one they send doesn't >come one day too late. It was just a bunch of insults to Frank, something like "get lost if you don't like it here..", "apologize..". I do not see a reason to reply to that junk. -S. >>-S. > >-R
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.