Andrew Denny said on December 9, 2003 at 12:40 PM

Debbie says: “Some are saying [the anti-spam bill] will be an invitation to spammers to work even harder.” 

Well, it would be no bad thing. My real beef against spam is not simply the deluge, but the pointless inanity, incomprehensibility and irrelevance.  It would be more bearable if there was intelligence, cleverness and readability to it all, and even a modicum of relevance. 

However, driving it even further into illegality will only stop some intelligent, far-sighted spammers coming up with spam that really works, stuff we genuinely want to read, something we actually want to buy.  Once it’s actually illegal, there will be no incentive to develop a ‘Spam Marketing Assocation’.

My lateral-thinking view: Perhaps if Wal-Mart or some other marketing-savvy behemoth could get involved, it might raise the standard of spam, and thus drive out the amateurs!

Luckett Tiffanie said on January 20, 2004 at 11:43 PM

No cause is so right that one cannot find a fool following it.

Decker David said on May 3, 2004 at 09:34 AM

Art is vision, not expression.

Gologor Matthew said on June 3, 2004 at 09:26 PM

Make sure you still have something worth wishing for.

Lee Brian said on June 30, 2004 at 11:46 AM

Gratitude is the most exquisite form of courtesy.

——-