|
|
Posted by Gary L. Burnore on 01/06/08 22:39
On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 22:28:54 +0000 (UTC), Neredbojias
<monstersquasher@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:15:42
>GMT Gary L. Burnore scribed:
>
>>>> Spam is well defined and has been for years. Jerry and a few
>>>> dipshits want to redefine spam. If they could succeed (they can't)
>>>> they'd make USENet unreadable as real spam would be free to pass.
>>>
>>>Well, I admittedly might not be adhering to the technical definition
>>>of "spam" but spam to me is anything off-subject which I find
>>>offensive and in particular attempts to influence the reader in ways
>>>not germane to the scope of the group. Be that as it may, I'm not
>>>going to argue about it and promulgate the offense. Whatever it is or
>>>isn't, most of the posts in this thread are definitely not wanted by
>>>the vast majority of perusers where they do, indeed, appear. The
>>>posters of said material are clearly either oblivious or indifferent
>>>to the fact. Ergo, one man's spam is another man's crap - all of
>>>which is undesirable.
>>
>> The problem is, calling something spam when it's not does two
>> things(*): It lessens the real meaning of the term, making it harder
>> to fight those things that are actual spam, and it makes the person
>> claiming it be spam to fight an unwinable fight.
>>
>> Instead of calling it spam, call it what it is. Off topic. If you're
>> in a comp.* group, covered by an enforceable charter, that's enough to
>> get someone to stop in most cases.
>>
>> (*) probably more than two but those are the two that are relevent.
>
>Well, I agree with your basic statement, but allowances should be made for
>general usage because whether we like it or not, many people will so-
>generalize typical "crap" as "spam" in blythe unconcern for the actual
>definition of the term. This seems quite reasonable to me but I suppose
>reasonability is out of place in these specific environs...
The problem with general usage of the wrong term is that people know
that ISPs will Term an account when someone spams. So you send a spam
complaint but it's about something you just don't like to read or
something off topic and a lazy admin nukes someone's internet access
for no good reason.
If enough people call shoplifting pack of gum robbery long enough,
shuld the kid stealing a pack of gum be charged as a felon? Of course
not.
Alt.* is set up the way it is for a reason. So to the Big-8 groups.
Alt is mostly a free-for-all. If someone wants more control, they
propose a proper big 8 group with a valid charter. Then, in most
cases, the stuckkles of the world will back down when faced with
charter violations. A single advert to a comp group can be reported
as off charter. Not spam, but off charter.
All that said, yeah. I understand that you'd like a nice quiet place
to talk. Killfiles are good for that. I've NO problem if you want to
killfile me. In fact, in posts to stukkie, I've been adding
alt.usenet.kooks specifically so that you and anyone else who wishes
to ignore the threads about jerry can simply killfile on that. If it's
crossposted to alt.usenet.kooks, it's not really worth reading.
--
gburnore at DataBasix dot Com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³
Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase
===========================================================================
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|