User talk:Anro
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Governments have limited powers, and this matter is something beyond their jurisdiction. Some governments overstep themselves and try to exert power where they have no right to do so, and one of the worst offenders is the US Government (that's why the USA is in so much trouble in the world!)
But leaving aside all the politics, quite simply the US Federal Law has no power to tell you whether it's raining in the UK, whether God exists or doesn't, whether something smells bad or not, and whether you are inconvenienced/annoyed by some e-mail or not! These limits on powers were understood by wise rulers such as King Canute who knew full-well he could not hold back the sea, but are neglected by some regimes who sooner or later are heading for trouble.
It's not just that the Government of the USA has no jurisdiction over the rest of the World, despite all the sabre-rattling and pontificating that you see, it's that NO government has the power to tell you what the truth is in your own mind!
So, if you receive an unsolicited e-mail which you can't reply to and which you find annoying, then YES, IT IS SPAM! No amount of Americanist Legislation will make it not so.
So the actual real definition is defined in the relationship between the sender and the recipient. If the sender has no consideration or care for the recipient, then it is spam.
This is not easy to prove for any particular case, as it is something in the mind of the sender, but let's try to illustrate the concept by a few examples:
Suppose someone sends out a friendly message to several of their friends, that's not spam.
Suppose someone sends out a bulk e-mail to members of an opt-in list with proper remove options, then that's not spam either.
Now the real defining point...
Suppose someone sends out an e-mail to a lot of people who they've never met, (ie unsolicited), then it isn't necessarily spam, provided that the sender accepts that any of the recipients may REPLY and may enter into communication. (The way to measure this is by doing a thought experiment where the recipient puts the same amount of human resources into the reply as the sender did as per a one-to-one message. If this is wasted, then the original message is spam). So, a sender who understands and accepts that the recipients may reply and start talking to them, isn't really sending spam.
Some might say that ANY e-mail which is ANNOYING is SPAM, but this is a bit extreme. Of course it's valid if that's what they think. After all, the individual has higher authority than the government.... or does it?
[edit] Mediation Cabal case
Hello there, Anro. I have volunteered to mediate the case regarding Peoples' Global Action. Please voice any opinions and evidence you have supporting your stance at the relevant page. Only with your cooperation can the case be resolved peacefully. Thanks. --physicq210 17:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi Anro, I requested this mediation b/c I think that a third party perspective could be beneficial in resolving the "skirmish" on the PGA page. Although I am skeptical about the strength of User:Harrypotter's sources, I think that his willingness to engage in open debate presents the possability of an equitable solution. I hope that you will be willing to participate! - N1h1l 18:27, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
