On Mon, 16 Oct 1995, Dave Siegel wrote:
I don't think we really want any more laws that criminalize ill defined acts.
Agreed. Until the net community defines what is spam and other unacceptable messaging, we have no foundation to build on. Can anyone define concisely what exactly is 'spam' ? Or this this possible?
It is a meat-like substance which is delivered in a tin can. It can be quite good for breakfast with eggs if you can stand the grease content.
;-) Sorry, couldn't resist.
spam: Any posting which contains an advertisement of a product. posting: Any peice of electronic material found either in a UseNet NewsGroup, public mailing list (listserv), or a private mailing list.
I really don't see what the big deal is in all this.
-- Dave Siegel President, RTD Systems & Networking, Inc. (520)623-9663 Systems Consultant -- Unix, LANs, WANs, Cisco dsiegel@rtd.com User Tracking & Acctg -- "Written by an ISP, http://www.rtd.com/ for an ISP."
Is every email you send then a spam since it contains an ad for UTA? I don't think it is, but it is according to your definitions. IMHO, a bad definition. I am more favorable to the one that news.admin.* uses where anything which is posted to over X number of groups is spam (or velveeta if it follows a slightly different rule). SPAM should not be content based. If I sent out a copy of the bible to every single user on the internet (quite a feat to get the address list), I would consider that a spam, and I need not be advertising any product. Hell, if I sent everyone on the internet the letter "a" it would probably crash a few machines. So, what's the definition? Justin Newton * You have to change just to stay caught up. Vice President/ * System Administrator * Digital Gateway Systems *