DID YOU KNOW...how to squelch Mr. Spalthoff?

Thread View: misc.rural

2 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

2 total messages Started by Sandra D.Helbig Sat, 23 Nov 1996 00:00

#1529

Author: Sandra D.Helbig
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 1996 00:00

59 lines
3565 bytes

Dear Geoff:

You sort of missed the point.  Don't take a quote out of context.

The point for all that missed it was the irony and hypocrisy of an
employee of AT&T objecting to any type of advertising activities.

That you don't like spam is OK.  You have a right not to like spam.  I
have a right to like spam.  We can even agree to disagree on the
subject.

And don't you think Mr. Spalthoff should have revealed his relationship
with a competitor of the internet providers he was challenging?

Sandra D. Helbig
lawpage@access.digex.net

Article: 5661
Newsgroups:
misc.rural,ba.general,biz.marketplace.international,biz.marketplace.ser
ices.non-computer,biz.misc,houston.personals,la.personals,nj.misc,nv.pe
sonals,nyc.general,nyc.personals,oh.general,ok.general,pa.general
,rec.arts.misc,rec.misc,soc.men,soc.women,soc.misc,rec.arts.books,marke
plac
e,rec.arts.books
From: geoff@netcom.com (Geoffrey Leach)
Subject: Re:
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 1996 19:06:22 GMT

helbig@ix.netcom.com(Sandra D.Helbig) writes:

>Come off it.  Commercial endeavors pay the bills.  Spamming pays your
>salary.  Spam is good.  Spam is great. The vast majority of people on
>the web are engaged in for profit endeavors.  You would recognize this
>too if you had any real world experience outside your corporate
>culture.  These people who are spamming have more going for them than
>you ever will.

Such nonsense.  Sigh.

First.  Unsolicited telephone solicitation (referred to as "spam" in
the post) is frowned upon by the FTC.  Callres are _required_ to 
cease calling you if you request them to.  They can be prosecuted
for not doing so.

Second.  Unsolicited commercial email and similar postings to
newsgroups
do not "pay the freight".  They are, in factm theft of system resources
by the poster.  Their cost to all parts of the Internet _other_ that
the poster
is considerable.  On to of that, many, like myself, have a committment 
never to patronize a company that engages in such practices.
-- 
Geoffrey Leach          C/C++/X11/Motif Implementation
geoff@netcom.com        Mountain Ranch Software
			12846 Whiskey Slide Road
                        Mountain Ranch CA  95246-0336
                        209-754-1869

Re: DID YOU KNOW...how to squelch Mr. Spalthoff?

#1672

Author: Thomas G. Spalthoff
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 00:00

40 lines
2891 bytes

<most of the "personals" crossposting snipped - I'm married, thank you very 
much>

In article <577k4b$3vp@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com>, 
helbig@ix.netcom.com(Sandra D.Helbig) wrote:
>
>The point for all that missed it was the irony and hypocrisy of an
>employee of AT&T objecting to any type of advertising activities.

You have a point here.  If I so strongly object to bad advertising practices, 
is that in conflict with how my employer does business?

But is it relevant?

Does everyone working RJR advocate smoking?  Do I advocate downsizing because 
that's what AT&T does?

I have taken some of your observations to heart.  I've changed the wording 
on my Unsolicited Email page.  I will not pass judgement (eg using the word 
"shame") on those who take part in the practice.  I leave that as an exercise 
for the student.  This should satisfy most of my critics.

>And don't you think Mr. Spalthoff should have revealed his relationship
>with a competitor of the internet providers he was challenging?

I've never hidden my relationship with AT&T.  I've never changed my return 
address or name in the header of my messages.  This probably contributes to 
the volume of Unsolicited Email I receive, but I feel strongly that if I'm 
going to make statements, people should know where they're coming from.  I do 
not give any credence to people who try to make arguments, but hide behind an 
alias.

BTW Why would a lawyer be suggesting that I be "squelched?"  Wouldn't that be 
a violation of my first amendment rights?

--Tom

Thomas G. Spalthoff                 "Moderation seems to be the key"
tgs@planet.ho.att.com                                    J. Buffett

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads