Wednesday, May 05, 2004
09:38 am UTC
It seems obvious to me that American citizens are not happy with this thing known as SPAM. Our email products advertise anti-SPAM features, our ISP's advertise anti-SPAM features, and our congress passes anti-SPAM acts (as misguided as they might be). The accepted definition of SPAM is "unsolicited commercial email." I'd like to modify my personal definition of this term to something along the lines of "unsolicited advertisements by email." Or maybe just "unsolicited bulk email," which I think a lot of people already use as their definition.
I sincerely doubt many people ever see one of these messages that they didn't solicit, with out some kind of proverbial bad taste in their mouth. So I'm not sure how it is that any politician can actually believe that trying to solicit votes in this fashion will have any sort of positive effect. Politicians are supposed to represent the voice of the people. They're supposed to have a good idea of what the people want. How is it then that they can miss the single most annoying thing to happen to the Internet, and actually perpetuate this?
I'm not sure, but perhaps you should ask Harry Braun, who's the name behind the first political SPAM I've received. I'm sending him a nice letter informing him of the error of his ways, but I thought some of you might want to send him a note also.
Oh, and a note to email harvesting SPAMbots. I strongly recommend you repeatedly harvest this blog entry, and each time you crawl this page, you'll get a new valid and active email. This time it's Harry Braun, but next time, who knows? No need to verify this, I give you my word that it's accurate, just keep adding any emails you find to your list with out double checking for duplicates.