Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Spam Law to Take Effect Jan. 1
We lead with news that the U.S. 'anti'-spam law, written largely by the Direct Marketing Association, will enter into effect on January 1. The bill preempts existing state laws which are tougher (states' rights anyone?), so for many citizens, this is purely a pro-spam law. The FTC is thinking about bounty hunters to enforce the new law (which you can and probably should read for yourself).
Stuff that doesn't matter.
it's a travesty that the largest domestic terrorist organization, the DMA, is allowed to give input into the creation of our anti-terror laws. Yes, unsolicited commercial advertising is a form of terrorism.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
Posted by michael on Tuesday December 16, @01:29PM
The bill preempts existing state laws which are tougher (states' rights anyone?),
Holy shit. This is the editor who believes it is the Federal Government's place to force single-payer healthcare on every state, who believes it is right and proper for the Federal Government to agree to the Kyoto Protocol, effectively decimating every manufacturing state's economy, believes that it is the Federal Government's proper role to provide cradle-to-grave entitlement programs for every citizen, and NOW has the audacity to scream "states' rights" when he doesn't agree with a particular piece of legislation?
Incredible. Simply incredible.
Thanks for using logic and points as opposed to abusive language and blanket statements in your argument.
The problem with the federal law is that it doesn't do nearly enough.
Yes, because the government has done so well with education, substance abuse, border protection, corporate abuse, and the economy. With a record like that, I can see why you would want more involvement.
-t
http://unmoldable.com W:"No one of consequence" I:"I must know" W:"Get used to disappointment"
Wow, how many biased rantings are found in michael's own submitted article? The story's headlined led us to believe it would be about the anti-spam law. Instead michael jumps into:
1) Calling it the 'anti'-spam (in quotes, of course...because michael doesn't like it.)
2) Adding the line "written largely by the Direct Marketing Association" (to feed michael's extreme anti-business slant)
3) "The bill preempts existing state laws which are tougher (states' rights anyone?)" That's what the federal government does michael...it's been doing it for over almost two hundred years now.
4) My favorite... "so for many citizens, this is purely a pro-spam law." Wow, nice opinion and conjecture...without even having backed it up yet!
5) And to continue the rant, michael throws in one last final attack by mentioning the possibility of bounty hunters possibility.
Thanks michael. Once again you showed a complete lack of professional journalism. But then, we always knew you were heavily biased and slant the facts, since you admitted it yourself. I also find it ironic that you try to portray yourself as a moral spokesman on such matters, when you are unethical, hypocritical, and can't be trusted. But if you don't like this thread, you can always censor it, like you and other Slashdot editors have done many times in the past.
Shut the fuCk up cocksmOker.
From the FA:Supporters envision the day when armies of 18-year-olds will be transformed into a global posse,
I would much rather 18 year old pussy, thank you very much.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways