@cauce the "attempt" to differentiate them is a joke and doesn't pass the "reasonable recipient" test. @jacaldwell
-
-
Replying to @jcohenmktg
@jcohen808
@jacaldwell from sum1 else: IMHO it's clearly marked as an ad is colored differently, slightly separated from the other messages2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cauce
@jcohen808
@jacaldwell wiki email definition: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email says it requires a header and a body portion, ads only have one@cauce2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @EmailKarma
The fact that I'm taking a harder line here than
@EmailKarma and@cauce is highly amusing cc/@jacaldwell1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jcohenmktg
@jcohen808
@emailkarma@jacaldwell yes we agree, it is amusing. you may want to talk to a lawyer about how canspam doesn't apply.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cauce
@cauce@emailkarma@jacaldwell back when can spam was drafted ISPs weren't (knowingly) involved in sending spam to consumers themselves1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jcohenmktg
@jcohen808
@emailkarma@jacaldwell that too is wrong. it was only when Y! and MS came to support canspam due to concerns that it passed1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cauce
@emailkarma@jacaldwell ok so@cauce supports unsolicited advertising in consumers' email inboxes as long as it doesn't have a header. Cool!2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jcohenmktg
@jcohen808 I certainly think that is a stretch and you know it. Ads != emails
@jacaldwell@cauce1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @EmailKarma
@EmailKarma@jacaldwell@cauce they have from lines, subject lines, u can open them and fwd them. The only thing missing is header. R u 4 rl2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@jcohen808 @emailkarma @jacaldwell Seriously, it is an easy thing to file a complaint with the FTC about ads. Do so, keep us posted.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.