While some of Waterproof LED Linear Lights Factory the SpamCop members are simply tired of the

same kinds of spam that irritates us, there are others within

the movement who have an axe to grind with everyone who crosses

their path.

To suggest to a SpamCop member that folks should be trained in

the nuances of who to complain against in a complaint, you can

expect a reply like this. "Jerry" answered my suggestion

precisely this way:

"SpamCop users are literate, intelligent, virtually all college

educated, well-versed in spam, and are more computer-savvy than

99% of the world's population. It is presumptuous and arrogant

in the extreme to imply they need a Learning Annex class to

detect spam."

The question I have is to whom the term "arrogant" should be

applied?

This is what my webhost said about my last SpamCop spam

complaint, "As far as I know spam is generally considered to be

high volume unsolicited email. So, as long as you are not doing

that then I am not sure why it would be called spam."

CONCLUSION: While the anti-spammers rail on the ugliness of

spam, it seems they are perfectly willing and likely prefer

that the only people permitted to send email should be those

they directly give permission to.

Personally, I find the practices of the radicals of SpamCop to

be more offensive than the activities of the spammers. It is a

terrible thing to say, I know, but the spammers simply irritate

me and the SpamCop fanatics try to oppress my activities.

Osama bin Laden brought external terrorism to the United States

on September 11th, 2001. But the truth is that terrorists have

long existed in our country on our own soil, and great numbers

of them proudly were the shield of SpamCop.