|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
Re: [PLUG] Re: what is the best way to bulk email 2 million opt in email addresses?
|
if you do end up getting the email address list, do me a favor an perform
a
perl -pi -e "s/leroy@leroybrown.com//"
on the file first. thanks!
stephen
-- my name is not leroy
On Thu, 9 Dec 2004, W. Chris Shank wrote:
> Nice snippet. I see you didn't bother snipping the first of my response.
> Good spinning.
>
> It's up to this fellow to decide if he wants to be a spammer or not.
> It's not necessarily illegal and morality is an individual decision as
> well. Difference between spammers and postal workers is that business
> have to PAY to have each piece of junk delivered. There is no pay system
> for email (yet). So the cost of delivery of spam is the burden of the
> equipment owners. If sending snail mail was free your postal carrier
> would make 10 trips to you house each day and he'd have to drive a
> tractor trailer full of mail. And as for the "recycling" part of bulk
> mail - as a resident with a postal address you implicitly agree to
> dispose of your mail - wanted or unwanted.
>
> I disagree about condemnation. If you knew someone that worked for a
> telemarketing company that took advantage of elderly for some
> quasi-legal scam, would you condemn them? Would yourself work for this
> company? But I guess that touches in a whole separate societal issue.
>
> On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 09:18 -0500, Paul wrote:
>
> > W. Chris Shank wrote:
> >
> > > Tell your employer to spend the money he'd pay you (plus a lot more)
> > > on a mail marketing campaign. He'll get better results.
> > >
> > Uh, that might be easy for you to say since you are self-employed. We
> > have at least one person here who is paid to work on anti-spam
> > technology, and at least one person here involved in what most people
> > agree is spam. Though I believe spam and even junk paper mail should be
> > stopped at a *business* level, I don't think we should condemn an
> > individual trying to make a living.
> >
> > Personally, I'd rather receive junk e-mail than junk paper mail. It
> > must take much more energy and resources to create, distribute, and
> > recycle paper mail.
> >
> > As my father likes to point out about recycling, businesses are giving
> > tax deductions and reduced postage rates to distribute their garbage
> > while the unwilling recipients must deal with the garbage. We are told
> > it is our duty to protect the Earth by recycling. We don't get paid to
> > do it, but that recycled material is worth money. So, everyone else is
> > saving money or making money while we're bombarded by ads to convince us
> > to spend more money while being required to clean up the mess!
> >
> > It is arguable that the Post Office, paper manufacturers, printers,
> > advertises, etc., are all benefiting. But, when is the last time you
> > told a Postal worker to give up their salary for the ideal of having
> > less junk show up in your mail box? The problem must be corrected at
> > the source.
> > ___________________________________________________________________________
> > Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
> > Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
> > General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
>
> --
> W. Chris Shank
> ACE Technology Group, LLC
> www.acetechgroup.com
> 866.229.1543 x10
>
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|