Re: E-mail Spamming

Posted by Randi Slaughter on October 01, 1997 at 06:23:23:

In Reply to: E-mail Spamming posted by Ginger Haskins on October 01, 1997 at 00:24:01:

: Why is it OK for people to send junk mail to our postal addresses?

: I for one want to be the one in charge of deciding whether I read or discard my mail; whether it be postal or e-mail. I often get e-mail advertisements that are very interesting and "check them out."

The above poster brought up another side of this issue than what has been posted previously, and although I agree with some of what was
said here, there are a few points to consider on the other (apparently majority) side.

I've left in the reference to junk snail mail, because that to me is the primary difference here. The snail mail spammer has to pay for the
brochure, the actual mailing costs, and if they're doing their job right, the tracking of the piece to see how well it was received. Yes it
depletes a natural resource, but some at least are turning to recycled paper. Yes, they get a cheaper rate from the PO, but they have to do
the presorting and bundling to receive it.

E-mail spam on the other hand wastes a resource that I am paying for, just like telephone sales. I cut off telephone sales reps quickly,
asking to have my name removed from their lists. I haven't reached the level of annoyance with spam to do the same, but I would like to have
the equivalent of the DMA (marketing association) to be able to register the desire to 'cease and desist'.

If E-mail spammers have to pay as they go, and in a way that solves the potential costs of what they're doing, I would have no objections.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: : Why is it OK for people to send junk mail to our postal addresses? : : I for one want to be the one in charge of deciding whether I read or discard my mail; whether it be postal or e-mail. I often get e-mail advertisements that are very interesting and "check them out." : : The above poster brought up another side of this issue than what has been posted previously, and although I agree with some of what was : said here, there are a few points to consider on the other (apparently majority) side. : I've left in the reference to junk snail mail, because that to me is the primary difference here. The snail mail spammer has to pay for the : brochure, the actual mailing costs, and if they're doing their job right, the tracking of the piece to see how well it was received. Yes it : depletes a natural resource, but some at least are turning to recycled paper. Yes, they get a cheaper rate from the PO, but they have to do : the presorting and bundling to receive it. : E-mail spam on the other hand wastes a resource that I am paying for, just like telephone sales. I cut off telephone sales reps quickly, : asking to have my name removed from their lists. I haven't reached the level of annoyance with spam to do the same, but I would like to have : the equivalent of the DMA (marketing association) to be able to register the desire to 'cease and desist'. : If E-mail spammers have to pay as they go, and in a way that solves the potential costs of what they're doing, I would have no objections.