Re: What Constitutes SPAM?
From: Joel M. Eichen (joeleichen_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 01/13/05
- Next message: Joel M. Eichen: "Re: What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Previous message: Joel M. Eichen: "Re: Convergence: Internet and cell phones."
- In reply to: Robert Morien: "Re: What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Next in thread: Vaughn Simon: "Re: What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:02:15 -0500
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:53:25 -0800, Robert Morien
<PhD_failure@nousefulinfo.com> wrote:
>In article <EEwFd.14523$hc7.6347@trnddc08>,
> "Gregory P. Cole, B.S., D.D.S. \(Flap\)"
> <drgregorycole.dds@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> Joel, is it ok to cut and paste my blog entries here? Since you are doing
>> that with your Dentalcom ones?
>
>At best Joel is a Troll, at worst he is a spammer. Do you want to be
>associated with either. Remember, all these posts are archived by google
>and some day one of your patients may do an online background check of
>you. It might take a bit, but they would eventually ascertain that your
>good buddy was a spammer, and then they ask themselves "how good of a
>dentist can Dr Cole be?"
>
>
>>
>> Peeps might be interested in some of my stuff..... maybe not... but we will
>> see!
>>
>
>You have seen, don't make it sound like there is any question about the
>(lack of) quality or the degree of on-topic you are.
>
>You seldom are on topic and even less frequently have anything of
>quality to post.
>
Let me guess ...this is really Mark Tarka!
Joel
>> --
>> Gregory P. Cole, B.S., D.D.S. (Flap)
>> www.smilesforalifetime.com
>> Flaps Dental Blog
>> http://flapsblog.blogspot.com/
>> Liberae sunt nostrae cogitationes
>>
>>
>> "Joel M. Eichen" <joeleichen@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:s74du0l9i5kh81478jkk8qldf84jp4c51h@4ax.com...
>> > 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.
>> >
>> > Without commercial interests, the usenet or bulletin boards, was an
>> > extremely costly affair. I recall buddies who paid hundreds of dollars
>> > per month for a simple messaging system. They used it for business
>> > purposes, not for chatting endlessly.
>> >
>> > One guy was a radio show talk host who used it to get ideas for his
>> > show.
>> >
>> > Me too.
>> >
>> > I use the resources consistently for ideas. Therefore I am quite
>> > tolerant of people who want to support it with some
>> > informational/cxommercial blending.
>> >
>> > This is not SPAM. Spam to me means too much of anything is no good.
>> >
>> > Joel
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
- Next message: Joel M. Eichen: "Re: What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Previous message: Joel M. Eichen: "Re: Convergence: Internet and cell phones."
- In reply to: Robert Morien: "Re: What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Next in thread: Vaughn Simon: "Re: What Constitutes SPAM?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|