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

From: Ed Prochak <ed.prochak_at_magicinterface.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 00:44:16 -0500
Message-ID: <LZy1c.823$xL.18@fe03.usenetserver.com>

Ed Avis wrote:

> gforestieri9_at_yahoo.com (Greg Forestieri) writes:

>>Is SPAM for a $10 database product less SPAMmy than one that costs
>>$10000?

>
>
> No - they are both worthless content and clog up the newsgroup.

So we agree here.

>...  Spam

> (or at least how I think of it) is marketing gibberish, giving very
> little useful information, and focused solely on getting money out of
> people.

Oops, you slipped back to: if it makes money, its spam. What if the corporation was in chapter 11? would that allow it to post ads and have them not be spam?

>...  If the spammers want to make money then they even have an

> incentive to make the message fairly content-free and not admit to
> failings. This is called marketing.
>
> OTOH, a well-written announcement of a free software project can be a
> useful and relevant article on a newsgroup, and start an informative
> discussion thread.

And the one that started this thread obviously faileed that test. The subject line made it appear to be a DATABASE in stead of an interface.
>
> Of course it is possible to post meaningless marketing drivel for free
> software too, but in practice it doesn't happen

Oops, but at least you didn't say it NEVER happens 8^)

and the reason is that
> the postings are made by individuals (not companies) who have no
> financial incentive to resort to hype and cover up the real details.

I've seen hype for freeware too. The incentives include: advertise the author's programming skills (thus to get work doing similar programming),
get the program used (thus to get support work for enhancvements and bug fixes), get something else advertised (like the banner section in the freeware version of OPERA).

So while there may not be direct financial incentives, many of these programs do have other indirect financial gains for the poster.

> Further, the author of a free program will often be able to respond to
> questions about it on the newsgroup, which never happens with spam.

And most such authors are willing to post under their own name. You do. I do. But who is SkidRow?
And the original posteer was:
Analysis&Solutions (info_at_analysisandsolutions.com) THAT's an individual's email? Smells like a corporation address to me.
>
>

>>The whole idea behind having more than one news subgroup is so that
>>we don't have to sift through "material" we don't want to.

>
>
> Indeed. In my case I am glad that we have a separation between .misc
> and .marketing, with non-commercial messages going to .misc, so that I
> don't have to sift through all the dubious 'material' on .marketing to
> find the small number of useful free software announcements. At
> least, this is the arrangement that the current charter suggests.

But not what the group prefers.
>
> Other people don't like the free software announcements and they would
> rather not have to look at those (even though they are quite small in
> number) when reading .misc.

The point is not to have ANY software announcements, free or otherwise.

>
> I think the way to keep both groups happy is to split the hierarchy:
>
> - comp.databases.oracle.misc - discussion, but no announcements of any
> kind

IOW keep this group as it is.
>
> - comp.databases.oracle.marketplace - commercially oriented messages
IOW strictly interpret the charter (but then where do we post our resumes? That's not a commercial post, is it?)
>
> - comp.databases.oracle.free-software - announcements and discussion
> of free programs related to Oracle, but no spam allowed
>

If you put the new one up for a vote, I'll suport it. Though honestly I don't think it's needed.

-- 
Ed Prochak
running    http://www.faqs.org/faqs/running-faq/
netiquette http://www.psg.com/emily.html
--
"Two roads diverged in a wood and I
I took the one less travelled by
and that has made all the difference."
robert frost

Received on Wed Mar 03 2004 - 23:44:16 CST