Comments on: Defining spam

By: Define “spam” – Word to the Wise

Define “spam” – Word to the Wise — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 21:11:09 +0000

[...] This post is an updated version of What really is spam, anyway?. I also talk about the definition of spam in Defining Spam [...]

By: Mickey Chandler's Spamtacular | When is a press release an advertisement?

Mickey Chandler's Spamtacular | When is a press release an advertisement? — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 21:14:41 +0000

[...] let me begin by saying that I agree with Laura Atkins, who says that “spam” is an ill-defined term. In his post, Mr. Arrington tosses around the term “spammer” rather blithely, without [...]

By: Does It Matter If Your Email Is Legitimate?

Does It Matter If Your Email Is Legitimate? — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 02:46:57 +0000

[...] me. And if you’ve ever cared about words “email blast” or “opt-in” or “spam,” maybe it’ll matter to you, [...]

By: Peter Blair

Peter Blair — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 04:41:41 +0000

At $WORK (OpenSRS.com) I define spam as any piece of mail that the end user no longer wishes to receive. It may be a once cherished newsletter, or an unsolicited piece of pharmaceutical mail. This is why I think that proper usage of “Spam” button and feedback loop adoption is so crucial. People are afraid of using the unsubscribe links in emails — ISPs need to create FBLs, and senders need to treat those FBL messages as unsubs.

By: J.D.

J.D. — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:16:27 +0000

It’s easy to iterate on trying to define spam by measurement, but that loses the end-user perspective — they don’t know (or care) whether anyone else received a similar message.

By: Mike Hillyer

Mike Hillyer — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:33:00 +0000

I’d look at bulk, at least conceptually, and being the opposite of individual. If I email you directly, one individual sending to another, it is not bulk, it is personal. You remove me personally composing and hitting send and replace it with an automated system and a template, you have bulk.

By: Nazzareno Gorni

Nazzareno Gorni — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 12:46:44 +0000

I think #1 is the best one, as defined by Spamhaus (http://www.spamhaus.org/definition.html). The only thing to be determined is when “bulk” happens. More than 10 emails per hour? More than 1000 per hour?

By: Huey

Huey — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 23:26:26 +0000

I think that #1 and #3 are the only relevant definitions, #1 because ‘unsolicited bulk email’ is a reasonably solid technical definition, and #3 because “email our users don’t want” is ultimately what drives blocking decisions at most big ISPs. So it’s in the best interests of any sender to avoid as much as possible sending anything that fits either of those two, which unfortunately includes the squidgy bits where those two definitions don’t intersect.

By: Trout

Trout — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 22:39:53 +0000

Personally, I say “mail I did not sign up for”. My job says “mail our users hate, en masse.”

By: Morgan Stewart

Morgan Stewart — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 21:59:15 +0000

We recently conducted a series of interviews with subscribers on the street asking the same question: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DneCa-slhAw

My personal favorite, “Every bull$#@% email I don’t want to read.”