Slashdot Mirror
Student Faces Suspension For Spamming Profs
edmicman sends word of a Fox News report about a Michigan State University student who is facing suspension for bulk emailing a number of professors at the university about a proposed change to the school calendar — an e-mail that the university is labeling spam. The article contains links to a copy of the original email, the allegations against the student, and the university's Email Acceptable Use Policy. The student, Kara Spencer, asked a Philadelphia rights organization, FIRE, to get involved. The article quotes the FIRE defense program director: "The fact that MSU is considering punishment of Spencer simply for exercising her right to contact selected faculty members by e-mail shows a disturbing disregard for students' freedom of expression. ... Threatening a member of the student government with suspension for sending relevant, timely e-mails to faculty members is outrageous." Spencer is awaiting the school's judgement after a hearing, and vows to take to the courts if suspended.
Clearly, the solution is to mass mail all students at the university for support.
it's linked in the news article. It was well written, not off topic, and expressed a reasonable concern about the time period students have to get to know the school apparently. It was not "spam" at all.
It sounds like the professors are more butthurt she got their email addresses than interested in responding to the concern she expressed.
They simply should have redirected her appeal to the right people if it was not appropriate to be sent via that email list. Instead they are being punative.
There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
Is spam any unsolicited commercial email sent out to 20 or more recipients? If so, this is not spam.
Is spam any unsolicited advertorial email sent out to more than 1 person? If so, this is not spam.
Is spam any unsolicited email sent to more than 1 person? If so, this is spam.
The problem here is we need a legal definition of spam to define what it is. Then once the public knows what spam is, we can prosecute those who send it illegally, and stop wasting our damn time arguing what it is. Personally, I like the definition of any unsolicited email sent to more than 20 people...regardless of the content.
The most basic answer is that we're not still back in the day on Usenet. Word meaning is fluid, especially when it comes to slang. Cross-posting is more difficult in e-mail and on forums these days, than it used to be on Usenet with some news clients, and so those elements of the definition have become archaic. People use the term 'spam' in the context of unsolicited mail because that's the only context they have for it.
I'm really sick of replies like this:
Civil disobedience is fine, IMO. Have at it, but don't come blubbering when Mr. Consequence arrives to the party.
This is a canned comment that tools make on any given story about someone standing up to establishment stupidity. This is the same attitude that southerners commonly took towards blacks protesting fucked up laws. Now, I'm not saying that her cause is anywhere near the same level of fighting jim crow and southern racism in general, BUT, if you look at how civil disobediance in the south(and elsewhere) actually works, you'll see that the "blubbering" about the consquences IS PART OF IT. THAT'S HOW CHANGE IS ACHIEVED AGAINST STUPID POLICIES.
You have to not only disobey stupid policies, but then you have to whine bitch and moan about the consequences it if you want them changed and if you want a just resolution. THAT'S PART OF THE PROCESS OF CIVIL DISOBEDIANCE. You don't do that last part, you end up a door mat of the system, rather than someone who forces it to change.