Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!demon!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!auvm!NETCOM.COM!catbird
Comments: Gated by NETN...@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 989
Message-ID: <199405200224.TAA06249@netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 19:24:36 -0700
Sender: English Language Discussion Group <WORD...@UGA.BITNET>
From: Catbird <catb...@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Income Opportunities from Investment Banker - Interested?
Comments: To: WORD...@uga.cc.uga.edu
In-Reply-To: <199405192027.NAA15160@netcom.com> from "Jim Thomas" at May 19,
              94 06:35:33 pm
Lines: 22

> There are laws against harassment, Carol, and spamming is arguably
> harassment.
>
> It is also possible to show damages when folks are charged by the time
> on the system. Not all systems have killfile capacity.
>
> I agree that legal action is inappropriate, but for persistant spammers,
> a few hundred separate suits might get their attention.

Glad to catch you in a pedantic mood, Jim.  Just the other day I was
wondering what "spamming" was.  Pretty soon I won't even have to post my
words questions here; I'll just wait for one of you to sense the wrinkle
as it passes across the Group Over-Forehead.

But hey, speaking of "unclear on the concept," I was questioning Mr.
Kolaks' judgment in spraying his threat all over the same mailboxes that
were polluted by the original post, not the legal advisability of a
harrassment suit.

But now you've got me interested.  So can <I> sue <him> now?  For
harrassing me in the course of harrassing the guy who harrasssed him?

Carol