Date:  Wed, 10 Apr 1996 10:20:15 -0400

From:  Ronald Butters <amspeech[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]ACPUB.DUKE.EDU>

Subject: Re: Interesting Free Offer...........



On Tue, 9 Apr 1996, M. Lynne Murphy wrote:



> the reason why i was in favor of closing the list to outside posters

> is because you can't send nasty notes back to the posters of these

> damned magazine ads. you spent your time crafting some really

> offensive response to these guys, only to have it turn up back in

> your own mailbox.

>

> the fact that you have to fax (or something) to take advantage of

> their offer indicates that they never had any intention of reading

> any e-mail responses.



*****Obviously, there is no point in writing messages to people who will

never read them! But the obvious solution to your personal problem would

seem to have been, "don't write the messages," and not "change the system."



> as natalie said, anyone who wants to post to ads-l from multiple

> addresses only needs to subscribe w/ the no-mail option at those

> addresses. that individual effort by those who want such

> accessibility would be a nice gesture toward the rest of us who are

> sick of ads being used as a junk-mail slot.



*****If this is what the group decides is desirable, then I can do it. I

belong to another group that functions in that way, and I can deal with

it. Especially now that the fait is very much accompli.



> sure, we have delete

> buttons, but we also have limits on how much mail our mailboxes can

> store and how much time we can spend reading things before we

> realize they're not from legitimate ads-lers. it's also a matter of

> principle. i want the spammers to know we (ok, i) don't like them.

>



*****If you want to let them know that you don't like them, then jam their

mailboxes. They will never know that you don't like them if they can't

get access in the first place.

    As for wasting time, I am sure you have spent much more time

reading and writing these messages--dealing with the BURNING issue of how

to rearrange the list to punish spammers and free us from the three or

four such messages we may get in a month--than you have dealing with

those very spammers in the past year! And now I am asked to waste even

more time

figuring out how tosubscribe to the list from my other e-mail account.

And of course Natalie is asked to waste her time deciding which way to go

with this issue--she has already (somewhat precipitously, in my view)

changed things already (to my inconvenience), and I guess I won't ask her

to change it back again. Sometimes, if it ain't broke more than a little

bit, there is no point in trying to fix it and risk breaking it a little

bit more.