Ah, that is the same response the spammers give. "A lot of people appreciate our offer of Viagra, if you don't just delete it, what's the problem?" So if everyone did the same thing there would be so many invites that the legitimate ones would be lost in the noise. Exactly the same as spam. Exactly.
Have stopped using any adders. Was only running about 300 invites a day to users that would have been interested in my band. i.e. Already in the friend lists of bands we play with. Myspace decided to limit our account for spamming. They stated that any accounts created before a certian date found to be using adders will be deleted, other will be limited (not allow requests/comments/messages). We were using space adder with is an application that runs on the local machine. Good news is we got our account back after many emails. bad news is we lost a great promo tool for ticket sales and the release of our upcoming EP. thoughts???
Well before everyone started doing this, it wasn't so bad. But now I always get a ton of group invites for stupid groups. (If the people pushing live web cams would quit, that would help a lot...)
Every type of advertising is SPAM -- when you watch tv, you get loads of mindless ads that you have no interest in. same thing.
There is a vast difference between "unsolicited mail" (aka spam) and legitimate advertising. I cant be bothered to go into detail but if you cant distinguish between the two, you should go back to school.
Wow, rationalization at work. Your homework assignment is to list 100 different ways that spam is different than legitimate advertising. Start with the principle "If everybody did it would it still work?"
They taught you at school the differnce between spam and legitimate advertising? what school did you go to? I looked up the Definitions of "spam" -- and it refers only to junk email or junk newsgroup postings. so i was wrong about the term. But i still think that all advertising is the same. first item on the top of those definitions is "unwanted, irrelevant, or inappropriate messages" -- now think about adverts on tv, you are watching the fantastic tv show "dead like me", then the ads come on, they have nothing to do with the show you are watching, are they not irrelevant, unwanted messages? I understand that "ads" help fund the company showing the tv program, and "spam email" only get money for themselves. --- so you are right in one way, but i still just see it as spam. Espcially sky -- when i've paied £30 a month for tv, showing adverts aswell is a right con. compared to even the bbc. (off topic i guess, but i just had to explain the way i see it) cheers.
TV ads cost the advertiser money. They don't flood your TV so you can't find the programs you are looking for. They are accepted by the consumer as the price they pay for the programming. The ads are controlled by the channel. Spam costs the advertiser very little or nothing. It floods the channel with unwanted information so it is difficult to find legitimate information. The consumer pays more for the spam than the advertiser, since he has to wade through it and the cost of sending it is negligible. In a newspaper or TV the advertisers are paying for or subsidizing the content. In spam the advertiser is a parasite on the content, not contributing at all.