Debate : 11418


Off-Topic / Debate / 11418	11417 \| 11419

Subject:	What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Thu, 5 Jul 2001 21:28:31 GMT
Viewed:	594 times

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Matthew Gerber writes: > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: > > From my usual source, the Libertarian propaganda (NOT spam, mind you, I > > wanted it sent it to me, and I, as a regular participant of this group, feel > > it's worthy of discussion, so people who initially label it as spam are rude > > or clueless, take your pick) that I get in my email... > > Come on, Larry. Look at it like whoever labeled it spam did: while YOU may > have requested it, lugnet.off-topic.debate did NOT request it...you posted > it for public consumption unbidden...that's why someone called it spam. > That's all (Well, and MAYBE to get your hackles up, but it wasn't me, so I > don't know 8?) ) People initiate topics all the time. Initiating a topic is, by nature, unbidden, except perhaps in the larger context of the events of the day raising awareness. So, then, any topic that is initiated by anyone can then be labeled spam by any other participant? That's the result of carrying your argument to its logical extreme. If you think that's a correct outcome, fine but I still think it's rude to do so. But somehow I suspect you don't actually think that. As for doing things to get people's hackles up... this is a free speech forum, true, but not all free speech is value add. Is it the mark of a mature debater to do things just to get someone's goat? Is that an attribute we want to foster here? No, and no. It's not a mark I consider mature and it's not an activity I would choose to see fostered here. ++Lar

Message has 2 Replies:

		The purpose of lugnet.off-topic.debate (was Re: What is spam?)
(...) Man, you're just lookin' for a debate (any debate!) today, aren't ya'? 8?D I know I'll likley break my own word at some time in the future, and probably get lambasted then for doing so, but here goes: <way too rightous for my own good> I read (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
(...) How right you are. But pasting all this LP crap into LUGNET is one step away from pasting adds for chocalte bars or cars. There are real issue out their which are worth talking about - your selfish breed of politics is not. It often surprises (...) (23 years ago, 9-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
(...) Come on, Larry. Look at it like whoever labeled it spam did: while YOU may have requested it, lugnet.off-topic.debate did NOT request it...you posted it for public consumption unbidden...that's why someone called it spam. That's all (Well, and (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

189 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)

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

Custom Search