Subject:
|
Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 17 Feb 2000 21:40:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
484 times
|
| |
|
|
Hello Jeremy,
First let me apologize, I agree with many of the replies that it
was not a gentlemanly thing for me to have publicly criticized
you in such a fashion. I meant you no disrespect personally,
it's very easy to become dettached when you're just looking
at a monitor and reading - albeit, no excuse for my lack of
civility. Again, I sincerely apologize.
I do, however, stand by my initial point - minus the apparent
hostility. Any gathering of more than one individual is going to
be fraught with imperfection. My point was that there are
bigger fish to fry - don't sweat the small stuff. I get spam all
time. I scan the titles and keep what may be interesting and
delete the remainder.
There are plenty of ISP's that offer unlimited access for as low
as 12.99, which is what I have. There are also plenty of free
e-mail providers. That's the great thing about competition.
My hot button was what I perceived as wining about something
of little consequence. In the grander scheme of things (life, death
and suffering) this is quite minuscule, yet admittedly annoying.
I just don't have the time or patience to stop and complain about
such matters, there are far nobler tasks to undertake. These types
of nusances will never be resolved. That is not to say that we
should sit by and do nothing, I agree that measures should be taken
to combat these types of harassment, although I do not see what
good can come of complaining. If I have mischaracterized your
initial post as complaining, again, I apologize. I realize that it may
have been a well intentioned informative message. That's why I
said that none of this is personal, please don't be offended.
And, yes, I remember quite well the meaning of Semper Fidelis.
I have sacrificed my own well being for the sake of others because
of my dedication to it. I don't see how it applies to this matter.
Since there are other means of which one may avail himself to
remedy this problem, the concept of faithfulness is irrelevant.
Respectfully,
Bill
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jeremy H. Sproat writes:
> James Brown wrote:
> > "The internet", meaning the companies and organizations that provide the
> > hardware and software that makes this all possible, collectively spend
> > millions every month in spam-related costs. That's JUST direct costs. It
> > doesn't reflect potential loss of revenue or bandwidth related costs. So,
> > while it may not be a big deal to you, it is certainly a big deal.
>
> Agreed 100%. The biggest thing about spam that just steams me is the
> cost-shifting of advertising. In a traditional marketing situation, the
> advertiser pays the expense of hawking his product. With spam, the advertiser
> spends *nothing* -- all the cost is shifted onto the Internet as a whole, and
> the ISPs end up paying for it, and sharing the cost with *all* of their
> customers.
>
> And it's not just the extra time I spend hitting the delte key. And it's not
> just the increased bandwidth of junk e-mail. It's the very real overhead of
> time and hardware and personnel, to set up spam filters, to bring crashed
> routers back up, to invest in bigger and bigger hard drives just for the extra
> noise, to investigate and stop the spammers.
>
> If there's one thing the Internet has taught modern business, it's that
> advertising pays. And what better way to invest in advertising, than to get
> it for free? Spammers love what they do, without a care for the consequences
> of the malice they indulge in. They don't even attempt to cover up their lack
> of morals.
>
> Hot button issue for me, too. I will not take it lying down.
>
> Hey, Mr. Farkus, semper fidelis. Remember what that means?
>
> Cheers,
> - jsproat
>
> --
> Jeremy H. Sproat <jsproat@io.com> ~~~ http://www.io.com/~jsproat/
> Card-carrying member of the Star-Bellied Sneech Preservation Society
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
| (...) No offense taken. (...) But it is relevant to those of us who are employed in the computer networking industry. I, as a developer / administrator of networking technology, have a responsibility to myself and my career to ensure that wanton and (...) (24 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
| (...) Agreed 100%. The biggest thing about spam that just steams me is the cost-shifting of advertising. In a traditional marketing situation, the advertiser pays the expense of hawking his product. With spam, the advertiser spends *nothing* -- all (...) (24 years ago, 17-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
54 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
|
|
|
|
