Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Dave Platt would say:
>>>What criteria do you use to make your determinations of spam and
>>One clear rule is: article of a commercial advertizing nature in a discussion
>That may very well meet the definitions for "off-charter" or
>It does not appear to meet the definition of "spam", as held by most
>ISPs and most of the anti-spam advocates who post in
>news.admin.net-abuse.email. According to the most widely-accepted
>consensus definitions, "spam" is defined by volume of posting or
>mailing (it has to be bulk) and by its unsolicited nature... but _not_
>by its content (commercial or otherwise).
>I, personally, don't consider an occasional "Hey, we're looking for
>beta testers for a new product" to be inappropriate in a discussion
>group. If it becomes obvious that the vendor is actually chumming for
>potential customers, that could be a problem, and if they actually
>start spamming their ads every few days it _would_ be a problem.
Indeed. The trolling of:
"Our CAD package can replace both Visio and AutoCAD, and is virtually
guaranteed to be useful to _EVERY_ Linux user!"
[Feel free to insert misspellings and adverse changes of grammar
represents something problematic, especially when the vendor used to
post articles of that nature on a nearly daily basis.
In contrast, a solicitation for _actual beta testers_ seems to me to be
not abusive particularly when you consider the large amounts of other
"general rubbish" that get posted when people haven't a clue of what
the newsgroup is intended for and don't care.
The fact that the Linux _kernel_ is pretty strongly tied to GCC suggests
to me that comp.os.linux.development.apps would be a more appropriate
venue than comp.os.linux.development.system, but people are clueless
enough about what belongs here that that doesn't strike me as a _big_
"Some sins carry with them their own automatic punishment. Microsoft
is one such. Live by the Bill, suffer by the Bill, die by the Bill."
-- Tom Christiansen