Changes

I think you two are talking at cross purposes because you are using two very different definitions of "spam".  The common definition (OK, the really right definition is a pressed pork product....) is unsolicited commercial mass email.  This is the "spam" that most people mean, and it is indeed the subject of prosecution by authorities at various levels of government.  Within a wiki, there is another common, and very useful definition--placing an the URL of a commercial web site on a wiki page.  This is commonly called "spamming a link", and leads to having one's account canceled.  But it is not against the law on a wiki, unless one has gained access to that wiki through criminal means.  Neither the FTC, nor the FBI, nor any other government agency is interested in enforcing the Conservapedia Commandments.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 21:59, 14 April 2013 (EDT)

I think you two are talking at cross purposes because you are using two very different definitions of "spam".  The common definition (OK, the really right definition is a pressed pork product....) is unsolicited commercial mass email.  This is the "spam" that most people mean, and it is indeed the subject of prosecution by authorities at various levels of government.  Within a wiki, there is another common, and very useful definition--placing an the URL of a commercial web site on a wiki page.  This is commonly called "spamming a link", and leads to having one's account canceled.  But it is not against the law on a wiki, unless one has gained access to that wiki through criminal means.  Neither the FTC, nor the FBI, nor any other government agency is interested in enforcing the Conservapedia Commandments.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 21:59, 14 April 2013 (EDT)

:I disagree. Checkuser evidence seems to indicate that spammers are using botnets to send their spam. The botnet most likely consists of computers infected with viruses, in other words, the spammers are illegally using someone else's computer to do their dirty work. Such conduct is illegal. Besides that, companies such as Facebook and MySpace have sued spammers and won, for spam other than traditional email spam. I think Conservapedia could do the same. [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] 14:51, 15 June 2013 (EDT)

:I disagree. Checkuser evidence seems to indicate that spammers are using botnets to send their spam. The botnet most likely consists of computers infected with viruses, in other words, the spammers are illegally using someone else's computer to do their dirty work. Such conduct is illegal. Besides that, companies such as Facebook and MySpace have sued spammers and won, for spam other than traditional email spam. I think Conservapedia could do the same. [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] 14:51, 15 June 2013 (EDT)