|
Home > Archive > Properties for sale by owners > July 2005 > Re: The truth behind anti-telemarketing and spam laws...
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Re: The truth behind anti-telemarketing and spam laws...
|
|
|
|
On 15-Jul-2005, "jponiato" <jponiato@chartermi.nojunk> wrote:
quote:
> The problem is this: If I get junk mail in my old-fashioned mailbox, at
> least I
> didn't have to pay the postage - the sender did.
Because of junk mail people with small boxes have to waste their time
checking it every day. When they go on vacation they have to pay for a
larger storage box. The amount of damage done to the environment due to
deforestation and costs for garbage disposal etc. is costing us all. No
difference.
quote:
> If I get sales calls on
> the
> phone, I'm not expected to accept reverse charges. SPAM on the other hand
> is paid for by everyone who receives it, in their monthly ISP charges.
> Our
> ISPs
> pay for the storage and bandwidth, and pass the charges on to us in our
> fees. Sure,
> small businesses need to find creative ways to get their advertising
> message
> out.
> Expecting the general public to foot the bill just isn't fair.
Expecting the public pay the billions of dollars the US sends to Israel for
"humanitarian aid" isn't fair to the general public either. 99% of the
Internet is unused pages just sitting there. Just the anti-spammers crying
back an forth to each other's got to eat up a fair chunk. Not to mention the
disruption of communication blackmailing providers into using blacklists
cause. There's plenty of other wastes of our money resources and bandwidth
that don't carry a prison sentence.
--
All the best,
NOYB
| |
| jponiato 2005-07-29, 1:21 pm |
| > 99% of the
> Internet is unused pages just sitting there. Just the anti-spammers crying
> back an forth to each other's got to eat up a fair chunk.
Like spit in the ocean. Spam comprises over 75% of all email traffic now.
The drain on internet resources is huge. No doubt, junk postal mail
does cost us in terms of wasting natural resources, but you are eluding
my point, which was simply that we recipients aren't subsidizing the
senders marketing costs by paying the postage. With email, we are.
Peace,
Jp
| |
| Keter Pardes 2005-07-30, 10:21 am |
|
On 29-Jul-2005, "jponiato" <jponiato@chartermi.nojunk> wrote:
>
> Like spit in the ocean. Spam comprises over 75% of all email traffic now.
> The drain on internet resources is huge. No doubt, junk postal mail
> does cost us in terms of wasting natural resources, but you are eluding
> my point, which was simply that we recipients aren't subsidizing the
> senders marketing costs by paying the postage. With email, we are.
>
> Peace,
> Jp
Rather than worrying about the cost of wasted bandwidth, be glad you still
have an unrestricted flow of information. We have to take the good with the
bad in any free flowing information system. The governments, censors, and
general control freaks are just looking for an excuse to restrict global
free speech and they use people with your attitude as their minions. You
will get exactly what you deserve. Tail wags dog...
--
All the best,
Keter Pardes
(reply to me here I don't read my email)
|
|
|
|
|