Re: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?

[Shon Elliott <shon () unwiredbb com>]

Dean,

I started the thread with the original question, and after not hearing a
suitable response from either Spamcop or someone from the networking side of
Facebook, I gave up on this thread when people like Michelle started chiming in
their opinion. This thread wasn't meant to be an opinion-fest, but a technical
issue that definitely hampers my customers, which apparently, everyone
completely lost sight of. So really, my customers, and myself are victims of
Spamcop's blocking of Facebook.

-S

Dean Anderson wrote:
> What a load of BS from the "scammer/counterfeit-antispammer" crowd,
> otherwise described as con-artists and frauds.
>
>   "You're not authorized to solicit bulk email on behalf of third 
>    parties: only they are"
>
> Huh?  In this case, the third party (the user) authorized sending the
> mail on //their// behalf to //their// contacts.  This email doesn't go
> out except by action of the user.  The *recipients* of the email have
> indeed solicited email from the user; they are the contacts of the user.
>
> Basically, what the (well-known) con-artists are trying to say is that
> Facebook can't be authorized by its own user to send email from the user
> to the contacts of that user.  Finally, Linkedin, plaxo and other social
> networking sites do the same thing. ISPs also send email on behalf of
> their users, and have done so for many years.
>
> Last, just imagine if each of your contacts had to authorize which ISP
> you could use to send them email.  Facebook is just an ISP in the email
> transaction, offering a service to the user; so that the user can send
> email to their contacts.  Obviously both the user and Facebook benefit,
> but there is nothing wrong with that. Its not spam because its sent at
> the request of the user to people the user is already in contact with.
>
> Blocking facebook is a scam; an effort to shakedown Facebook for
> money/services/etc.
>
> Jim: Are you starting to see a pattern, yet?  There is no point in 
> arguing with con-artists.
>
>               --Dean
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 03:16:25PM -0400, jim deleskie wrote:
> > > If I leave all boxes checked to send mail/notices/app requests to
> > > everyone in my list, or if I give FB my gmail password to pull all my
> > > contacts and send them an invite, its pure @ my request, sure FB is
> > > happy I do it, but it is no way spam. 
> > This is dead wrong.  You're not authorized to solicit bulk email on behalf
> > of third parties: only they are.  In the absence of solicitation from
> > the *recipients*, bulk email is spam -- by definition.
> >
> > ---Rsk