TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Scott's posting had a lot of things that anyone could
legitimately take issue with (including the significant
omission of his vested interest in the site, the
pretense of objectivity in a clearly non-objective
situation, and the commercial bent to the message).
However, tagging a message that responds more
or less directly to questions posted on the list in the
last two days as spam does Scott a grave disservice.
Labelling any unwanted or commercial posting as
spam is tempting, but it's simply not accurate nor
fair (spam being a label that, once applied, pretty
effectively precludes rational discussion).
I'd agree that commercial postings should be both
relevant to ongoing discussions AND that they should be
clearly labelled as commercial (and the author's connection
to the message and product be made clear).
Eric
At 12:22 PM 7/16/98 -0700, Steve Arrants wrote:
>I disagree. It is spam because it doesn't seem to answer a question
>asked by a list member, it isn't objective, and he didn't identify
>himself as the owner of the business.
>Perhaps postings to the list that are business advertisements should be
>clearly labeled.
*********************************************************
* Eric J. Ray, ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com, http://www.raycomm.com/
* TECHWR-L Listowner, co-author _Mastering HTML 4.0_
* _HTML 4 for Dummies Quick Reference_, and others.
* RayComm, Inc., currently accepting contract inquiries.
