Is spam really a problem?

[sunder]

Tim May wrote:
 
> Ray has widened his definition of "spam" even more.

No, my definition is the same as it always was.  Maybe you didn't realize
how wide it was.
 
> You've mentioned that spam is theft. If the courts agree with you on your
> definition of what spam is, then pretty clearly the legal system gets
> invoked. (But to forestall any confusions in the courts, the anti-spam
> sentiment being discussed by Ray and many others is likely to lead to
> specific legislation. Sadly.)

It is my definition, if others agree, that's their business.  I'm not asking
the courts to do shit about it however.
 
> "Theft." Call the cops.

It is theft, and I do call the cops, or rather in this case the ISP's involved.
The problem is they can't do much as the messages are sent from throw away
accounts.

> So, your definition of spam has now been expanded to include someone who
> sends _you_ (you, not thousands, not tens of thousands) a message you don't
> care for.

Show me your spam filters.  Do you not have at least one individual's name
in that list whose messages you route to a folder of trash or delete outright?
I seem to recall that was the case quite a while back with a certain "Doctor".

Indeed, even you make decisions about what is or isn't spam based on WHO sends
it.  In this case, you, not thousands, not tens o thousands of others is making
a decision on what is or isn't spam because you don't care for it.

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    |Prying open my 3rd eye.  So good to see |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com|you once again. I thought you were      |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ |hiding, and you thought that I had run  |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  |away chasing the tail of dogma. I opened|.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"|my eye and there we were....            |.....
======================= http://www.sundernet.com ==========================