Guest guest Posted August 28, 2000 Report Share Posted August 28, 2000 > I would therefore appeal to the BES SysOp, Raktambara Prabhu, to either > levy the spamming fine or anul the membership of the sender of the > newsletter, Madhusudana (GKG), as per the agreement everyone else on PAMHO > has entered into. Despite my personal opinion about the text, the fact is that sending a text to only 3 conferences cannot be considered spamming. So it is up to the organizers of these conferences to deal with it. And various organizers apparently have different opinions. Your servant, Raktambara das The Bhaktivedanta E-mail Services Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 28, 2000 Report Share Posted August 28, 2000 > Certainly not, simply remove yourself from the conferences. I for one do > not appreciate being protected by censorship, no matter how well > intentioned. Don't you think most devotees can make up their own minds > whether or not something is simply propaganda or in fact revelation? yhs, > Kanti dasi Fair enough. I'll just delete it whenever it somehow manages to sneak into my inbox. Sorry for any negative insinuations. ys KDd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 28, 2000 Report Share Posted August 28, 2000 > At 22:06 -0700 8/27/2000, Srirama (das) ACBSP wrote: > > > I support the call for the Pamho.net sysops to enforce the anti-spam > >provisions we agreed to when we purchased our accounts. > > Fine, but that call is irrelevant to the present situation. > > Sending the newsletter - unsolicited - to lots of individual > mailboxes is a spam. > > Forwarding a copy of one newsletter to one conference is not a spam. Hang on, if the newsletter in question is totally IRRELEVANT to the conferences to which it was sent, and a conference is made up of individuals seeking to discuss in a dignified manner ONLY a specific topic like varnashrama, India news, or whatever then how is that an offensive ritvik newsletter sent to a conference that offends most of the individuals therein is not in the same category? It amounts to the same thing: The individuals in the conference become subjected to stuff they never d to in the first place. In essence the ritviks gatecrashed three conferences with their newsletter which is UNRELATED to the TOPIC of the conference. Instead of individual spamming that is COLLECTIVE spamming. But spamming is spamming. > Trying to control which texts get to be forwarded to a given > conference is censorship, especially when there are no rules of that > conference that prohibit such a practice. > > Ys, > Madhusudani dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.