internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
List archive
- From: "Josep L. Guallar-Esteve" <jlguallar AT maduixa.net>
- To: "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not
- Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 15:15:26 -0400
On Thursday 24 April 2003 02:06 pm, Brian wrote:
> I agree that turning the other cheek may be what is necessary. Gandhi
> believed this literally and just for the reasons you mentioned bellow.
> Sometimes it does take an act of submission and humility to show others how
> violent and arguably wrong something is. Funny how our internal "ethics"
> kick in when we see the direct results of our personal act of violence.
> Suffering.
Gandhi's non-violence strategy worked because "the other side" was an
understanding society, with moral and ethic values. Ghandi's non-violence
system doesn't work for the worked for Tibet against the Chinese. And it
didn't work[*] for SouthAfrica against the Apartheid.
[*] Non-violence alone didn't work
Spammers, have no moral, no ethic and no remorse. So "non-violence"
(ler the mailboxes fill up) would not work with them.
> I am not a luddite. Though I do believe that we have to work extra hard
> using written communication to keep it clear. You know how hard that
> sarcasms can be in e-mail.
> <sarcasm>
> Whoa stay off the road! Someone can't drive a stick shift. Whoa!
> </sarcasm>
I drive a stick shift. Stay off the road! :)
> So I guess the very fact that we are only communicating with the written
> word is the reason spam is so powerful. We have no easy un-ignorable way to
> make spammers feel empathy. Thus trigger an ethical response. Stopping
> spam.
So non-violence (letting mailboxes fill up) will not work.
Action generates reaction, be it "non-violence" or some other kind. Spam
generates anti-spam grass-roots movements, laws and lone rangers doing web
defacement (as happened to the Emailers of America (spammers association)
webpage.
Salut,
Josep
--
Josep L. Guallar-Esteve
AOL vs Josep -> http://www.ibiblio.org/sinner/aol.html
-
Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not,
Brian, 04/24/2003
-
Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not,
Josep L. Guallar-Esteve, 04/24/2003
-
Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not,
Jean-Paul Louis, 04/24/2003
-
Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not,
K. Jo Garner, 04/24/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not, Tarus Balog, 04/24/2003
-
Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not,
zman, 04/24/2003
-
Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not,
Brian, 04/24/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not, zman, 04/24/2003
-
[internetworkers] Re: Spam retaliation or not,
Lance A. Brown, 04/25/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: Spam retaliation or not, Brian, 04/25/2003
-
Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not,
Brian, 04/24/2003
-
Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not,
K. Jo Garner, 04/24/2003
-
Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not,
Jean-Paul Louis, 04/24/2003
- [internetworkers] Re: Spam [tangent #1], machett, 04/25/2003
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not, Beth, 04/24/2003
-
Re: [internetworkers] Spam retaliation or not,
Josep L. Guallar-Esteve, 04/24/2003
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.