This point of view is essentially an endorsement of ignorance. If you don't know what ombudsman means, look it up. It is not (of all places) academia's responsibility to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
>> leaves you wondering if "officials" have any clue how SPAMMERS operate..."
Actually it leaves me wondering if you have any idea how the law operates. As silly as this legislation may at first appear, you have to realize that (mostly) nothing is illegal unless there is a LAW to make it so. Yes, spam is already illegal in many states, but creating a law where spammers must insert adv-adult in their subject line is another point where would-be prosecutors can trip spammers up with, thus increasing penalties and even prison time. Its like when a murder is really heinous, prosecutors dont just try someone for murder 1, they get them on just about every count thats feasible to the case.
Slashdot Mirror
This point of view is essentially an endorsement of ignorance. If you don't know what ombudsman means, look it up. It is not (of all places) academia's responsibility to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
>> leaves you wondering if "officials" have any clue how SPAMMERS operate..."
Actually it leaves me wondering if you have any idea how the law operates. As silly as this legislation may at first appear, you have to realize that (mostly) nothing is illegal unless there is a LAW to make it so. Yes, spam is already illegal in many states, but creating a law where spammers must insert adv-adult in their subject line is another point where would-be prosecutors can trip spammers up with, thus increasing penalties and even prison time. Its like when a murder is really heinous, prosecutors dont just try someone for murder 1, they get them on just about every count thats feasible to the case.