Spam Hysteria by Robert Taylor

Spam Hysteria by Robert Taylor

Let me start this article by stating I am vehemently opposed
to spam and that it is the worst possible way to get your
message out. Various groups have been trying to stop spam
since it was first used on the internet. However, how can we
stop or outlaw something which has never been clearly
defined.

I have been unable to find a universally accepted, fits-all
definition of spam. There are many ideas about spam and just
what it really is. In my opinion it is receiving
unsolicited email (email which you have not opted to
receive). Even this definition must be applied judiciously
and with a certain amount of common sense.

For example, a dear friend could forward an email which you
find offensive. Should you be in a bad mood, you could
report your friend for spam (and also the originator of the
email your friend forwarded, even though it was not the
originator's intent for you to receive this unsolicited
email). In this situation the originator (who is innocent
of wrongdoing) and your friend will most likely lose their
ISP and web host provider simply because you are having a
bad day. Is this fair?

More and more ezine publishers and article writers are being
accused of spam and forced to fight their ISPs and web host
providers. Many of these spam complaints are totally
unfounded. In some cases it is because a person forgot they
subscribed to the ezine and when they receive it they say
they have been spammed. In other cases the person has
written an article which was published in an ezine accused
of spamming. Here all the advertisers and the article
writers are accused of spam and lose their ISPs and web host
providers.

These advertisers and article writers did not commit the
offense of spamming. They were accused by association.
Most articles written for the internet are free for
publication, which means anyone can use them as long as the
articles and resource boxes remain intact. Unless the
writer is being paid for the article, there is no way of
knowing when, how or by whom the article will be published.

The truly unfair method currently used to fight spam
considers everyone accused of spam to be automatically
guilty. The great majority of ISPs and web host providers
shut you down without a second thought when you are accused
of spam.

You are not given a chance to prove your innocence. Guilty
or not, you are shut down. For most of those trying to make
a profit on the internet, this is a sword hanging over their
heads. Every time they write an article for publication or
send out an ezine they are taking the chance of being
unfairly accused of spamming.

No ezine publisher or writer in their right mind would ever
consider the use of spam. Their livelihood depends on their
ezines and articles, so why would they use something which
would destroy that source of income?

Those who use spam as the method of getting their
advertisements out should be stopped. But not by taking all
the innocent people down with them.

True spam is usually fairly easy to spot. There is a bogus
return address consisting of nonsensical numbers and
letters, either no way is provided to remove yourself from
the list or a bogus address is provided as a means of
removing yourself from the list, there is a footer in the
message which contains a supposed act of the United States
Congress defining spam, or other such obvious items.

99.9% of the ezines I have read have a clear and easy way to
unsubscribe. Should you use the link and find you have not
been unsubscribed, it is possible you subscribed using
another email address which is being forwarded to your
current address. The ezine publisher cannot unsubscribe you
without the original address from which you subscribed.

If you are really upset by spam, why not concentrate on
those who are truly guilty of spamming, and not the
innocents. Use your efforts to punish the guilty instead of
indiscriminately crying spam every time a piece of email
hits your inbox.

As an ezine publisher I get a great deal of spam in my
inboxes. Rather than waste my precious time trying to track
spammers down or reporting them to Spam Cop, I use my delete
button. It is efficient and deadly. The spam is gone as
soon as I hit delete.

One of the truly great characteristics of the internet is
its use for the free exchange of information. This freedom
is being seriously challenged by those who believe in the
indiscriminate use of Spam Cop or other such anti-spam
organizations.

I can't speak for you, but I get a great deal of
information, education and entertainment from the many
ezines to which I subscribe. It would be a severe loss if
they all quit publishing because of the fear of false spam
accusals shutting them down.

In conclusion, spam should be stopped. However, it must be
stopped with common sense and discrimination, not with a
vigilante mentality. Being accused of spamming is one of the
rare instances in current human history where you are
considered guilty until proven innocent.

Whatever happened to the concept of innocent until proven
guilty?

Should anyone out there in cyberspace have a universally
acceptable definition of spam and a means of fairly and
judiciously enforcing it, I am extremely interested in your
viewpoints.


About the Author
Robert Taylor
Subscribe to the Key To Success And Wealth ezine. All new
subscribers receive a fantastic ebook valued at $38.50.
Subscribe by mailto:subscribe@keytosuccessandwealth.com
Please place first name in body of email. Send comments
to mailto:info@incomesolved.com