Spamhuntress

6 Responses to “Yet another blogsubmitter”

1. Just want to understand Says:
   October 30th, 2005 at 10:18 pm

   Just so that I understand.

   A person is promoting some crap that you don’t like. Ok, nothing wrong with that I guess. Yet, to “teach him a lesson” about promoting a product that doesn’t rise to your obvious high moral standards, you post this persons full name and full physical address on the internet for the world to see.

   And this makes you better than he is, how?

   You have potentially put that persons life in danger simply because you have the power to do so. Somewhat sickening don’t you think?

   After all, you are the self proclaimed moral majority. You are better than this person who makes his living promoting other peoples products. You are a better class of human being than he is, right?

   I am just guessing that this must be the case, because obviously you are so much better than him, that you play judge, jury, and executioner.

   It is self important, self righteous, and self appointed moral majority leaders like yourself who has put a black eye on the face of humanity on the internet.

   Shame on you.

2. Administrator Says:
   October 31st, 2005 at 2:36 am

   You say I’ve put his life in danger. The truth is the information I posted here is available to anyone. It’s public information. If anyone is inclined to put his life in danger, he would have absolutely no trouble finding that information. My post here would not help nor hinder that discovery process.

   As far as I know, no linkspammer has ever been physically harmed by irate bloggers or the like.

3. Joe Says:
   November 1st, 2005 at 3:13 pm

   It isn’t the products the spammer is promoting that is the problem except when it is promoting spamming software. It is how they promote them, their methods are just like vandalism and grafitti in the real world. It is spammers who put a black eye on the internet.

4. Olliver Says:
   November 11th, 2005 at 7:07 am

   “Just want to understand”, you invalidate your claims by the time you’ve written them:
   On the one hand you criticize Ann-Elisabeth’s moralism and the way she exposes those who annoyed her on the grounds of these expectations. But then, just a few sentences later, you apply the same moralism to her by writing:

   “It is self important, self righteous, and self appointed moral majority leaders like yourself who has put a black eye on the face of humanity on the internet.”

   You don’t emphasize it’s your personal opinion but formulate it as absolute, undefendable truth. How will you know it is? I somehow fail to see any rational argumentation that could back up your thesis. And yes, I disagree and you don’t speak in my name.

   The decision whether and when something is an annoyance is still up the one who’s personally affected. After all spammers have never asked Ann-Elisabeth whether she wants to have this sort of advertisement in her logs. Disregarding someone’s freedom and personal integrity can’t be justified by “just making up the living”. If you did, you could also justify physical violence or murder with “just making up the living”.

   Your comment ends with “shame on you”: Why? Because you don’t like Ann-Elisabeths style? I wonder who are you to tell people they should feel ashamed. And even more I wonder who are you that you are able to set moral standards other people apparently have to follow in order to be accepted. Well, accepted by whom? You? So what relevance has your opinion to the rest of the world?

   I’m afraid a reality check could help you understand that society is about acceptance and freedom ends where it harms someone else.

5. Administrator Says:
   May 7th, 2006 at 5:06 am

   Karl,

   You’re kidding right? Why would a provider that SELLS spamware do anything but laugh at you if you complain about affiliates spamming?

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website