Re: SPAM DB 1.6.0 has been released - now OT if not originally

From: Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu>
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 14:34:01 -0800
Message-ID: <1078353210.624220@yasure>

Ed Avis wrote:

>>It looks like a commercial product announcement, so it looks like it
>>belongs in .marketplace
>>
>>Does that not seem reasonable????

>
>
> Er, no, surely the test of whether an article belong in a group is
> whether the article's content is on-topic and within the charter, not
> a snap judgement based on the subject line.
>
> Maybe it 'looks like' .marketplace, if you don't look closely enough,
> but that doesn't seem enough reason to require it to go there.

Here's what I see from where I sit.

The definition of pornography is in the eye of the beholder and perhaps the definition of spam is the same. You are not offended by postings of such message and I, and apparently many other regulars, are.

So here's my proposed compromise. Anyone that wants to can post whatever they wish where-ever they wish. Those of us that are offended reserve the right to label those messages as offensive spam and make as sure as we can that no one does business with the spammers. You will not waste bandwidth in our usenet disagreeing with our labelling of the posts as spam.

Which is exactly where we would be had you not put so much effort into trying to convince us that what we find offensive isn't.

-- 
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

Received on Wed Mar 03 2004 - 16:34:01 CST