To clarify your reply:
I have been using Usenet now since 1994.
Because you have not seen recent posts does not automaticly mean I am 'new'.
"would you like me to message you at 2am" is indeed a threat.
Just as if you were to say to someone whom you have not spoken with ever
before "would you like a punch in the head?".
The threatening intent is within the question itself.
No doubt if you did this on the street to someone else and they informed
the police of your "would you like a punch in the head?" question you
would be soon on charges of threatening to assult someone, even if it was
a question.
Do not use that approach again otherwise (even if it was a question) you
might face the consequences of your actions with those who can take action
against you.
Let me first explain to you the concept of SPAM.
SPAM is, information which you have received in which you did not ask for or
perform any activity for that information to delivered to you.
The most common method for this is of course E-mail.
SPAM is most commonly refered to as 'unsolicited email'.
Meaning email about products and services which you do not do anything to
request in the first place.
Now lets talk about UseNet and the original posting.
The information was not delivered to you via mass e-mail, therefore it was
not e-mail SPAM, SPAM is directed at people individually that is why we
receive it in our own e-mail boxes. It is sent to an individual email
address which is unique.
My posting was not sent to any person or e-mail address directly.
The posting did not have information about the price, or features of the
product, it did however have informaton about where it can be located.
The originator of the posting was not fake unlike SPAM email today.
You did choose to open up the nz.comp newsgroup to read about computed
related issues, discussions, software, hardware, company names etc.
Since you did choose to open up this newsgroup, you 'subscribed' to
receive all the information within it. Posted by any person.
With SPAM you do not choose to do anything but still receive it.
Secondly you did choose to read the posting after viewing the header.
The posting may be linked to a commercial product, but you choose to
pursue the information within that posting.
If you did not want to read it you should not have opened it up.
The posting was not structured in a way in which products are normally
advertised (including in SPAM cases), the posting simply notified those
to new software being available and without advertising features, allowed
a link to more information on that product.
Hardly a fully blown commercial advertising 'venture' via UseNet.
SPAM is information that comes to you without your requesting it.
In this case it was your activities which brought that information to you.
That is, your choice to subscribe to the information within nz.comp and
also your choice to read more than just the posting header information.
If the posting was in an unrelated group such as nz.zebras then I would
understand your complaint better, however this limited information was
posted within the correct article group being related to computer information.
I hope that clears up your questions and I do hope in the future that you
do not indirectly threaten others with unwanted and clearing intentional
annoying SMS messages at 2am.
In article <bmnfa9$on33d$>,
says...
>
>Reply is inline.
>
>"Matthue Gera" wrote
>> Thank you for your interest David Edward John Hall (and unsolicited SMS
>> messages and treats for SMS messages at 2am).
>
>err treats, I would assume you mean threats, but all I said was "would you
>like me to send you messages at 2am" or somthing to that effect... I dont
>see a threat there, just a question.
>
>> Perhaps you would like to discuss SPAM some more?
>
>sure.
>
>> Should I email you at dave*nospam*. or write
>correspondance
>> to 123 Forfar St, Mornington, Dunedin?
>> Or perhaps call you back on 021-523260 ?
>
>Go for it... Im more than happy to discuss this further.
>
>> Maybe you are new to usenet?
>
>not really, 7 years and counting, you however, I havent seen posting around
>here, maybe it's you who are new?
>
>> I will take it that you are, posting on nz,comp that new shareware is
>> available for those who would like to try it is not considered SPAMMING.
>
>Commercial product(from the licience "This software is for product
>evaluation purposes only. Until purchased and registered."), where the
>charter specifically says they are not allowed.
>Seems remarkably like spam to me.
>
>> Most posts contain a single header line, this normallly describes the
>> posts content. In this case if you were interested you would have read
>> the content, if you were not interested you would have read other posts
>> instead.
>
>Good point, but doesnt change a thing, still against the charter...
>
>> The point being, this is a public forum posting facility.
>
>yes, public and non-commercial, which your post is not.
>
>> New shareware (under nz.comp) release posts in the past have not been
>> any problem, those who do not wish to particpate simply do not.
>
>Show me one that has "not been any problem" and I will promptly leave you to
>your spamming ways.
>
>> People talk about computer related content on nz.comp
>> Information about products, companies and even software is discussed also.
>> It is an OPEN forum for communication.
>
>Open yes, are commercials allowed, nope.
>
>> Please respect that next time and please do not send any more SMS
>messages,
>> those really do serve not point other than to show that you do not know
>> the different between email SPAM and open computer related posting issues.
>
>I know the difference, that was my point... is spamming a spammer immoral?
>
>
Similar Threads
