AOL has been suing spammers and winning. I personally think this is stupid. I get 500+ junk emails a day. I could care less. I just press the "Check all" box and click delete. Wow. That was hard. I really don't see the need to complain. And if you don't want to get them, don't go places (chat rooms, etc) or sign up to a forum and insert your email address. And Virginia even now has a law stating is a felony to send spam email :angry: . I am currently taking law classes and see nothing wrong with spam. It's just a mass message.
anyone else want to comment on this?

Use your email address with a brain, and you won't get spam. I get maybe one a month, or less.

Mine only appears on websites...I get dozens/hundreds of spams per day. I've signed up for nothing using them. Why is this a problem for me? Because I despise having to look over email carefully to see if anything I need to see is included among the garbage. (just hitting delete means I may miss a client's message)

I also have to pre-screen mail that my children see, because they have no need for p*nis enlargement or free pr0n memberships, nor do I.

I also hate having to foot the bill for the bandwidth that this uses on a daily basis when I will *never* do business with spammers.
*That's* why.. ;)

I heard about the Virginia law. A little excessive in my opinion. Like killing flies with a shotgun. You could kill someone and get less time.

I agree with you hypergfx.com. Alapo, it's great you get one a month. I have at least 15 email address. In my personal mailboxes I get very few spams. But for the others I get about 500/day. I use Mail Washer and it makes it very easy to delete the SPAM. This is a hot topic for many people and will never go away. As long as SPAM works people will SPAM.

The move to make spam illegal, and to assign more penalties for sending it than (possibly) getting booted off of one's web host are:

* all email traffic uses bandwidth, which costs money
* the spammers are bearing this "cost" equally with not only the recipients of the messages, but with the other users of the senders' and recipients' networks
* networks are private, NOT public
* therefore, private corporations and private individuals are subsidising spammers' activities - whether marketing or malicious (sending viruses) - rather than the delivery costs being borne entirely by the sender(s).
* owners and operators of networks don't want to pay the cost for these messages, most of which are unwanted - so they block incoming spam from known spam-tolerant servers, and don't allow spammers to (ab)use their services

If you're only an end user, you may not notice the overall cost of spam. Trust me. The rest of us do. If the costs continue to mount, we'll have to pass the costs along to you.

Now do you understand why you shouldn't be so sanguine about the spam you receive?

Personally, I think that spammers should receive the same kind of penalties hackers do. Jail terms don't do a whole lot of good, and just transfer the cost to maintaining them in jail: health care, food, housing, clothing. And in some jails, they may still have Internet access.

If they can't play nicely, take the toy away from them. Take away their rights to have Internet access for a time period, and remove all computers from their home. Force them to take jobs that don't require Internet-access computer use for the duration of their punishment.

* networks are private, NOT public not necessarily in the case of AOL. Or any email. If you want to do something private, don't do it on the INTERNET.

Sorry, I should have stated. Networks, other than military and scholastic networks, are, for the most part, privately OWNED by companies or firms or individuals, rather than state or federal bodies. They're not funded by monies collected by taxes. They're not like water processing, which is a public-works company, and is funded (in many countries) by the local government.

He (she) means networks are privately owned. Internet privacy is another issue entirely.
Even if the networks were publically owned, would you want your portion of the public support in the form of taxes or whatever, to support the delivery of unwanted (and often unsavory) advertising?

Want to know what spam does to a server when some loser spammer uses your domain to make up a fake address to place in the "from" feild of their spam? We got so many bounced messages, they jammed the mail que, and slowed the server down, till finally we had to delete the whole que to restore the server's performance, and many legitamate emails were lost. Almost 500 bounces got through before this happened. Considering all these were bounced, imagine how many emails these losers sent that didn't bounce? Imagine if our DC would had shut us down first (I bet they got a few complaints, but we contacted them first and provided proof that the fake email account didn't exist) and asked questions later?
I lost time and money that day. Plus a customer had initiated a domain transfer and because the email was in the hundreds of thousands that got deleted, he didn't get his confirmation email. After the 5 days had elapsed, the transaction was closed, but he couldn't try again, because by that time it was too close to the renewal date, so he had to pay $29 to renew instead of the $9 we were going to charge him. - and that's just two peoples stories -

Originally posted by hypergfx.com
AOL has been suing spammers and winning. I personally think this is stupid. I get 500+ junk emails a day. I could care less. I just press the "Check all" box and click delete. Wow. That was hard. I really don't see the need to complain. And if you don't want to get them, don't go places (chat rooms, etc) or sign up to a forum and insert your email address. And Virginia even now has a law stating is a felony to send spam email :angry: . I am currently taking law classes and see nothing wrong with spam. It's just a mass message.
anyone else want to comment on this?

YA,i think your foolish,SPAM SUCKS!!!!!! ITS ALSO ILLEGIAL FOR THEM 2 BE DOING IT,I DISLIKE SPAM W/A PASSION!!!!

The Dude :)