AW: [governance] [] US, UK and Canada refuse to sign UN's internet treaty

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

Do note unsolicited / unwanted to address your comment about receptiveness

--srs (iPad)

On 23-Dec-2012, at 15:37, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:

> In message <010601cde0ae$930397f0$b90ac7d0$@hellmonds>, at 02:41:05 on Sun, 23 Dec 2012, Peter H. Hellmonds <peter.hellmonds at hellmonds.eu> writes
>> There are a number of references throughout the text, notably under heading
>> 2.1 "What is spam?":
>> 
>> "Several stakeholders have given definitions of spam, and although there are
>> common points, there is still no universally accepted definition. Broadly
>> speaking, spam includes all electronic messages that are unsolicited or
>> unwanted, sent to a large number of users (bulk) without regard to the
>> identity of the individual user, usually having commercial purposes, and
>> that can include viruses that propagate via e-mail, or fraud and scam
>> mechanisms."
> 
> Curiously, this definition is almost the opposite of the previous one, concentrating as it does on "without regard to the identity of the individual user".
> 
> Using the same terminology as my previous email, it's mainly "bad spam" which has that characteristic.
> 
> "Good spam" is generally[1] targeted at specific people[2] as is my last category of "noise"[3].
> 
> But if they modified the definition to "without regard to the *receptiveness*[4] of the individual user", they'd be quite close to the mark.
> 
> [1] Although sometimes when "clueless marketers" buy lists of people to spam, those lists aren't very clean.
> 
> [2] For example, I bought a laptop online about six years ago, and still get an email once a week asking me if I want to buy another one, listing their current special offers. Definitely targeted to former customers but also definitely spam.
> 
> [3] Another way of looking at "noise" is that it's people cluelessly 'marketing' their ideas.
> 
> [4] Whether or not the email is "welcomed" by the recipient. However, this is such a subjective matter that it's virtually impossible to build a policy based on the concept. As a proxy, policy often uses: "did the recipient give their permission (implicitly or explicitly) to receive the email." Although that leaves many edge-cases, including the unsolicited receipt of welcome news like a job opportunity or an Xmas greeting.
> -- 
> Roland Perry
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t