RE: [CH] Chile spam?

Jim DeLillo (jimdel@bellatlantic.net)
Wed, 26 Feb 2003 15:49:13 -0500 

Scott,

Those same arguments can be made against hardcopy junk mail.

The additional carriers to carry it.
The cost being passed on to users through higher postage.
The cost and growing problem of recycling.
The pollution caused by not recycling.
The land we are running out of because of landfill.


But congress nor USPS will put a stop to it.  "Junk Mail" represents the
largest revenue producer for the USPS.
An entire industry of direct mail merges, purges, mails, tracks and
propagates catalogs, circulars, and other MASS mailings.
Another industry relies on the paper, printing, ink and production of same.
And those companies marketing via direct mail rely on their catalog being
delivered.
Do you ONLY get snail mail that you requested?

That said, how can you lump me into the same category of scam & Spam that
sends out millions of untargeted mailings?
The whole purpose of my mailing, if you read it, was to confirm permission
to keep you on the list.  If I didn't tell you what my products or services
were, how would you know.

That certainly is a courtesy not offered by the list of spammers that you
rattled off.

You're not interested, fair enough, you're off the list.

But we're off topic.

So your next subject line should read "OT - Spam" (that way I can filter it
out), there's nothin' about chiles goin on in this thread. So stop "wasting
bandwidth".


<< Jim >>

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-chile-heads@globalgarden.com
[mailto:owner-chile-heads@globalgarden.com]On Behalf Of Scott Peterson
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 3:16 PM
To: Chile-Heads
Subject: Re: [CH] Chile spam?


At 11:03 AM 2/26/2003 -0500, you wrote:

>I get about as upset about spam email as I do about junk mail from the
>post office- which is, not at all. In fact I'd rather get the junk email,
>because no paper is wasted that way. It takes me a fraction of a second to
>delete the digital stuff- not a huge effort on my part.

A lot of people do that.  But saying that spam doesn't cost you anything is
untrue.  Recently testimony about a anti-spam bill in congress put the
costs last year at about $8,000,000,000.....that's Billion and going up
almost exponentially.

There are huge costs beyond 'just hit delete'.  Bandwidth to carry it,
additional mail servers to process it, additional disk space to hold it,
administrative costs, complaint desks and legal costs.   AOL estimates that
at times as much as 2/3 of the mail they carry for their customers is spam.

On a recent update for their customers they said they were blocking between
20 and 30 pieces of mail a day per customer.  Given that my AOL account
gets that many a day, and multiplying it by 17,000,000 members works out
that their members alone are getting almost 700,000,000 pieces of useless
mail a day!

My ISP, Earthlink estimates that two to three dollars of each month's bill
is related to email/spam costs.

Call this a lot of things, but don't call it victimless or without
cost.  It's not and you're paying for it.

Mr. DeLillo may have made a mistake, but it's still a bad way to do
business because people are becoming less and less tolerant of it.



                          		Scott Peterson


Two wrongs don't make a right,
but two Wrights made an airplane.