Leaving technical arguments aside, as both sides made their point, my
argument is this: Whether we agree that Facebook answers the definition
or spam, or not, we do agree that some of their practices are bad.
Such as:
1. Emailing forever, rather than stopping after a couple of attempts.
2. Emailing people from address books (user need to pick which ones, but
still).
What we disagree on is if they can be called spammers due to how they
operate. I doubt we will agree on that.
The issue here from my perspective is pragmatism. Email is a service and
it is used in many different fashions, in ever evolving ways. Calling
everything which seems a bit different than what we've seen before
"spam" is counter-productive.
1. It lessens the message of anti-spam by over-zealousness.
Norms change, and service types change. If the people who deliver the
service can't keep up with the times, they should move aside. This is
not to say that abusive behavior should be accepted -- don't think for a
minute that is the case -- only that not everything new which works
differently needs to be defined as abusive.
2. Idealistic rabidness is pointless.
I am all for hanging spammers by the gonads, but aren't we going a bit
far? I want to hang spammers, not large email users.
If I get married tomorrow and email 300 of my friends with a wedding
invitation, am I a spammer according to your definition? If so, the
definition is too narrow.
Anti spammers, which I consider myself one (even if I fight at a higher
(or lower) level, depending on POV) often complain about the EFF. The
EFF is idealistic in nature, and believes Free Speech is paramount to a
level where blocking spam in ways such as Black Lists is, according to
them, offending free speech and should not be done.
I respect their position and appreciate them being around, but they are
nothing if not dorkish on this point. Without black lists, there would
be no email. Plus, every other system in existance limits "Freedoms" for
its own survivability - examples range from human society to computer
file systems. Systems create order out of chaos, it wasn't a right
before -- it was an ability.
Much the same as the EFF's silly position on spam, I view calling
Facebook spammers (whatever else they may indeed be, such as serious
offenders of privacy) to be misguided, counter-productive to the larger
fight, and obsolete in definition.
Gadi.
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
