[pmmail-list] Spam -- your definition

[PMMail OS/2 Support]

On Thu, 30 May 2002 16:04:56 +0100, Brian Morrison wrote:

>different from the use of postal mail. I really dislike the junk mail
>that arrives on my doormat on 2 days in 3, but I know that it cost the
>sender money so if their response rates are low their cost of sale is
>high. That is a self-limiting mechanism that email just doesn't have.

Not completely true. It is a self-limiting mechanism that email
suffers from *less*. But there is still a cost to sending unsolicited
email, just like regular junk mail. It's just lower.

>did they get my number?) but I also know that when I want double
>glazing I will call them. I can count on the fingers of one hand the

Yes, this is the central issue that bothers us all with unsolicited
commercial contact. Most of the time, WE are probably right -- if we
want something, we'll research it and buy the right version. Some
(rare?) times though, THEY may be right -- they might have something
we could use, but we don't know about it yet. I once sold radio
advertising and, even though you inherit a clientele when you start,
the majority of your work is cold calls. Most people disliked me for
asking them to buy, but the reality was, many of them could have been
better off with some form of radio advertising. Some didn't believe
me, but it was true. I could have shown them logical and statistical
proof of it.

Do we outlaw it because it bothers us? Will it harm us more to have
it or not have it? I'm not sure.

>number of things I have bought that I found out about in this way. If I
>had as many unsolicited commercial phone calls as I get individual
>unsolicited email (50 a day on bad days) then I would have blown an
>artery by now, every call would be met with a torrent of anger and

True, but emails are MUCH easier to deal with than a phone call. You
don't need to get up to answer them, you can delete them in much less
time than it takes to extricate yourself from a phone call (even if
that's only 3 seconds). So a higher frequency of email, but easier to
deal with each.

>spam defences bin 95% of it sight unseen). Most of it is clearly
>violating the laws of physics, natural law or the law of the land, and
>I get even angrier knowing that the remove addresses are not that but
>an address-verification mechanism.

Agreed. I don't know if I've ever even done the 'remove me' thing.
And I especially dislike the morons who try to sell me something that
is clearly fraudulent.

>This category is a pretty good definition, most spam I receive meets
>this. I do let go contact from one company I once bought something from
>who occasionally (semi-annually?) send me a short update news letter,
>although I never asked them to. Anything where email headers are
>obfuscated or cloaked or contain only numeric addresses goes straight
>into the bin, or is returned to abuse@<isp> immediately.

Good idea! Those ones really irritate me too. If you aren't willing
to disclose who you are, why would I EVER give you any money or time?


--
Trevor Smith
PMMail/2 Technical Support
pmmailos2@blueprintsoftwareworks.com

- pmmail-list - The PMMail Dicussion List ---------------------------
To POST to the list, send your message to:
pmmail-list@blueprintsoftwareworks.com

To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message to mdaemon@bmtmicro.com with the first 
line of the message body being...
UNSUBSCRIBE pmmail-list@blueprintsoftwareworks.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------