Subject:
|
Re: Spam by proxy ?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.theory
|
Date:
|
Sat, 19 Feb 2000 15:01:00 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
rsanders@svicSTOPSPAM.net
|
Viewed:
|
530 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> Requiring a join as a condition of sale/purchase is certainly legal in
> my book, but it's not a tactic I would use. Not sure I'd call it wrong,
> though. Nor is a note to you offering to purchase "spam", per se,
> Annoying, perhaps, but it doesn't fit the SPAM definition which has bulk
> mailing inherent in it. IMHO.
I don't think I called it illegal (go back and reread my post). Another
instance of targeted spam, although in this case, it is cleverly
interwoven with a (potential) purchase request. If the offer to purchase
is conditioned on signing up for one of those services, then (by my
definition) it is spam. Neither of the inquiries said "I want to buy
this, can I pay this way ?". Both of them left me with the impression
"I'm going to buy this, because the spiff will offset my cost" (my interpretation).
In any case (if I understand this correctly), there is nothing that
would have prevented them from signing me up, then never following thru
on the purchase. Making them my reference (again, my conjecture) from
then on. The opportunity for abuse seems to abound.
> I am seriously contemplating a modification to my factoring that changes
> the fee structure from a flat 1 buck for payment or receipt to a [.75
> cents if electronic, 1.50 if paper check] structure, as it is a LOT
> easier for me to pay or receive funds electronically. I just wish they
> integrated with Quicken.
>
> My notes to current factoree payees urge payment via X even if they
> didn't select it in the form.
>
> I would also consider offering discounts on sales to electronic payers.
> Heck, I know I will.
>
> Those all, I feel, are perfectly legit.
Agreed. I have no problem with someone selling a legitimate
product/service. Determination of fees based on
payment-type/work-required is also legit. Various regs/policies have
limited the ability of retailers to charge different amounts based on
payment type (cash vs CC). I think this may be about to change. X/PayPal
may be the reason.
> Don't count on regulation to save you from a crater. Do your due
> diligence. I've investigated X and PayPal and satisfied myself as to
> their bonafides. I also don't leave more money there than I care to
> lose, just in case.
Due diligence is fine and well. An industry type with a poor track
record invites regulation. People are flocking to X and PayPal almost as
tho it were the 'second coming'. Is this really 'free money' ? Is there
any such thing ? Where is the catch ?
> FUT market.theory as I am not sure that this is really an admin thread.
> Even the original contention that you were being spammed, while
> unfortunate and of concern, isn't quite within the admin charter I don't
> think.
Agreed. I could not decide if the appropriate spot was .admin.general
(for certain one, possibly both, originated because of lugnet posts),
.general (a topic of general concern), or .market.theory (as you set the FUT).
Ray
--
mailto:rsanders@svic.net
Experienced Macintosh developer seeks telecomuting position.
If you have such an opening, please contact me.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Solicitation, but not spam (was Re: Spam by proxy ?
|
| (...) I read it, thanks. Don't assume I didn't, thanks. Didn't say you called it illegal, merely pointed out that it isn't illegal, for the benefit of those that might think that it is. (...) I agree with your feelings in general, but I just want to (...) (24 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory)
| | | Re: Spam by proxy ?
|
| (...) Well, this isn't truly a MLM thing like Amway (or All Advantage for that matter). This is a one time, person A gets person B to sign up for X.com or Paypal, and person A makes some amount of money for that happening. Person B could get 100 (...) (24 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Spam by proxy ?
|
| Requiring a join as a condition of sale/purchase is certainly legal in my book, but it's not a tactic I would use. Not sure I'd call it wrong, though. Nor is a note to you offering to purchase "spam", per se, Annoying, perhaps, but it doesn't fit (...) (24 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.market.theory)
|
17 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
