From: "Rob McEwen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This is exactly why if, given the choice, I'd prefer to be "cold-called"
with a non-bulk personalized unsolicited e-mail rather than being
interrupted by a visitor or phone call. The former I can look at a time of
my own choosing, the later demands my particular time that moment.
Therefore, treating both as being just as evil doesn't help.
<<jdow: Cold call email or telephone has a basic problem with it.
Commercial TV is something that it is paid for by its advertising.
I tolerate the ads, especially if they are honest and straight forward
without attempting to hide themselves.
If I am on a pay TV channel I feel I should not expect to see any
advertising. I am paying to avoid the advertising.
If I log into CNN, MSNBC, Fox, or most other news services on the net
I expect to see ads. As it happens I filter them out for the most part.
I and some people I know have a very real problem with animated ads.
They can quite literally cause vertigo attacks. Fortunately my problem
is more or less in remission. I plead a special case and filter out
the ads that are normally paying for the site. Those with static (and
tasteful) ads can take the issue with my filtering their ads as well
as the animated ads up with those who animate their ads. It's too hard
to filter based on "animation" or taste.
If I own a fax machine it's resources are mine not yours. There is no
right on the part of any advertiser to use my paid for resources for
spewing reams of paper out of my fax machine to print their ads at my
expense.
As I asked one telephone solicitor, "Who's phone is this I am holding
in my hand? Is it mine or yours?" Then I asked, "Who is paying for this
phone service we are talking through?" Then I asked, "So since it is my
telephone and I am paying for the line for whose convenience is this
line here? Is it for your advertising or for my needs. Get off this
phone line, you are trespassing. Do not ever call again." In other words
I laid a guilt trip to the extent I could.
The same goes for this Internet connection. To what extent are the
advertisers, aka spammers, out there paying for MY facilities? The
answer is that they are paying for zero point zero percent of my
service. Therefore it is not for THEIR convenience that it should
be used. It is for mine. It is extreme gall on their part to presume
that I want to hear their message and waste my time. It is sublime
gall to use my OWN private facilities for their personal gain in order
to present their message to me. There is no justification on their
part for this misappropriation of my Internet connection resources
regardless of how small and incidental their usage may be.
What difference does it make if Mr. Spammer sends out 10 million
spams to 10 million addresses or if 100,000 businessmen send out
100 messages to carefully selected clients they've never dealt
with before? In either case the ISP facilities must handle the same
amount of unsolicited email. And I pay for this in higher base rates
for my connection. It is for this reason that I wish I had my chance
to break a spammer off at the knees. It is for this reason that I
have sworn an oath to all I hold holy that if I am on a jury in a
case involving a known spammer I will *NEVER* make a decision in the
spammer's favor regardless of the realities of the situation unless
doing so would free someone even worse. They are thieves and crooks.
Society has no need for them.
{^_^}
