At 10:04 PM 3/1/98 +0100, you wrote:
>[]  > BUT WHEN THEY ADVERTISE IT OR PUT LINKS TO IT WHERE THEY ARE NOT
>SOLICITED OR
>[]  > WANTED  THEY SHOULD BE DEALT WITH SEVERELY.
>
>Personally I get no more than 3-4 unsolicited "spam" e-mails per day. The
>number of off-topic messages on this mailing list is much greater than that,
>and the off-topic messages are also even less interesting than what the spam
>usually is. I therefore think that people like you are ten times as much of a
>problem as the spammers are (but both are of course problems).
>

I don't get it, someone who is calling attention to the problem of spam is
to blame for spam?

>[]  > like these and ESPECIALLY ON YOUTH ORIENTED NEWS GROUPS AND ANY THAT DO
>NOT
>[]  > PERTAIN TO PORN.
>
>The nature of the problem is obviously that the unsolicited messages take up
>space, makes the user think he got an interesting personal mail when it in
fact
>shows to be bulk mail, and that he needs to press "delete" an undesired
number
>of times per day. Not that porn is dangerous if "youth" sees it.
>

Well, I think (hope) most parents would be concerned about their teenage
sons/daughters looking at porn. It has always been the spirit in
tehcnically minded circles (such as amateur radio, for example) that
objectionable material should not be allowed into the discussion so that
young people (or anyone who finds such material objectionable) would be
able to fully participate in the discussion.

Besides, if we didn't have people who fought spam, lists like these might
not be possible (due to huge amounts of spam).

Sorry for taking up the bandwidth, I just thought that it was an important
point.


Sean





+--------------------------------+
| Sean Breheny                   |
| Amateur Radio Callsign: KA3YXM |
| Electrical Engineering Student |
+--------------------------------+
Fight injustice, please look at
http://homepages.enterprise.net/toolan/joanandrews/

Personal page: http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/shb7
mailto:shb7@cornell.edu
Phone(USA): (607) 253-0315