Subject:
|
Re: What is spam?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.theory
|
Date:
|
Sat, 19 Feb 2000 23:02:58 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
lpieniazek@novera(Spamcake).com
|
Viewed:
|
679 times
|
| |
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote:
>
> In lugnet.market.theory, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > Spam is unsolicited bulk email. That's the accepted definition.
> > Sorry, but I'm a stickler on this point.
>
> Hmm. Hmm. Not according to the Jargon File[1]. :)
>
> (What definitive reference are you using?)
That one, but I was working from memory.
> I think it's safe to say it is _an_ accepted definition, though! :)
OK. I yield. It is AN accepted definition, not THE accepted definition.
Most of the things we think of as spam are covered by senses 3,4 and 5
of their def. That includes mail you didn't ask for, flood postings to
newsgroups, etc.
However... and this is a crucial point if we are to get back on track
:-) (remember Alice? This is a song about Alice's restaurant) NEITHER a
mail in response to an offer to buy, targeted to one person, with
onerous conditions of purchase attached, NOR an advert embedded in the
siggy of a message is spam.
THAT'S my point. Those stretch the meme beyond what it is and I object
to using the term spam for either of these.
--
Larry Pieniazek - lpieniazek@mercator.com - http://my.voyager.net/lar
http://www.mercator.com. Mercator, the e-business transformation company
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.
Note: this is a family forum!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: What is spam?
|
| (...) Hmm. Hmm. Not according to the Jargon File[1]. :) (What definitive reference are you using?) I think it's safe to say it is _an_ accepted definition, though! :) --Todd [1] (URL) (24 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
17 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
