Re: Apologies for "spamming"

From: Andrew Barton <AndrewBarton_at_...>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 16:54:21 -0500


> Sorry for posting an expired link. The survey was there the day before -
> that's when I heard about it and took it. There was no indication of an
> expiry date of any sort.

Since my earlier post I've heard the same from a friend on another list. The survey must have been there for quite a short time. Anyone know how to get a message to Yahoo management pointing out that their survey results will be severely biased?

> Re. Spamming. I am against spamming, but I do not consider my post to be
> spam.

I stand by my original criticism. Posting a warning directly to this list was (IMO) OK, in fact a public service. Asking us to forward it to other lists in chain email style was not. Why? Chain emails may never stop once started (there are cases where they're still running years later), so you never know whether the warning contained in them is still relevant. Also, 'genuine' chain emails make it more likely that people will fall for the far more common hoax virus warnings that infest the net.

In this case, we had the opposite problem to the usual one. The message WAS timely, but many of us assumed it was not because of the manner in which it was posted.

Andrew

Powered by hypermail