No, don't. Spam is offensive to most because the advertiser is externalizing part of the cost of the ad. The spam victim pays for network transmission and disk storage. The spammer offers no choice - the externalities are involuntary.
Lick the lollipop of spamming once and you'll suck forever. Once you've decided to steal resources from a large number of victims, you can justify just about any other morally reprehensible act.
Its pretty final. Spamming annoys the vast majority of people. Spammers ruin the medium they use to spam, telephone, usenet, email are all overrun with spam.
Whatever your case, if you spam you will be justifiably reviled, and regarded as a scoundrel.
Also, you failed to address any of my points. You've already become morally sleazy, ignoring valid objections because you want to externalize costs of advertising.
No, don't. Spam is offensive to most because the advertiser is externalizing part of the cost of the ad. The spam victim pays for network transmission and disk storage. The spammer offers no choice - the externalities are involuntary.
Lick the lollipop of spamming once and you'll suck forever. Once you've decided to steal resources from a large number of victims, you can justify just about any other morally reprehensible act.
Author here. I try and make a case for the offense being permissable for certain members of society.
Unsolicited commercial email is legal in many jurisdictions. There are some good reasons for it being so.
Your moral stance is fine. But it is not final.
Its pretty final. Spamming annoys the vast majority of people. Spammers ruin the medium they use to spam, telephone, usenet, email are all overrun with spam.
Whatever your case, if you spam you will be justifiably reviled, and regarded as a scoundrel.
Also, you failed to address any of my points. You've already become morally sleazy, ignoring valid objections because you want to externalize costs of advertising.