Re: What Constitutes SPAM?
From: Robert Morien (PhD_failure_at_nousefulinfo.com)
Date: 01/13/05
- Next message: Robert Morien: "Re: What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Previous message: Robert Morien: "Re: Content versus SPAM, which is more valued?"
- In reply to: Joel M. Eichen: "What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Next in thread: Joel M. Eichen: "Re: What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Reply: Joel M. Eichen: "Re: What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:49:34 -0800
In article <s74du0l9i5kh81478jkk8qldf84jp4c51h@4ax.com>,
Joel M. Eichen <joeleichen@yahoo.com> wrote:
> PROMOTED TO ITS OWN THREAD:
>
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:26:58 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
> <vaughnsimonHATESSPAM@att.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Adenosine" <adeno@nospam4u.org> wrote in message
> >news:ifncu0h2jg0msa8ooodrhtnd71hbgkcnbp@4ax.com...
> >> On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:14:41 GMT, "Vaughn"
> >>
> >> It's a legitimate site.
> >
> > Suit yourself, but no spammer is legitimate. When a business ignores
> >one accepted norm of civil behaviour, what makes you think that it will
> >shrink from ignoring others? Doing business with spammers perpetuates spam.
> >
> > Allow me to give an example: You happen to be at your bank when the
> >place gets robbed. You are the only person who recognizes the guy behind
> >the mask. It is your dentist. Do you show up for tomorow's appointment?
> >
> >
> >Vaughn
> >
>
> This brings up an interesting subject.
> This is not SPAM. Spam to me means too much of anything is no good.
You are in effect a perfect example of the above. You are too much of
anything. By your own definition you are a spammer.
>
> Joel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
- Next message: Robert Morien: "Re: What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Previous message: Robert Morien: "Re: Content versus SPAM, which is more valued?"
- In reply to: Joel M. Eichen: "What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Next in thread: Joel M. Eichen: "Re: What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Reply: Joel M. Eichen: "Re: What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|