You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Killing transparencybot - A message to spammers with no SP!
Spamming comments is why.
He can very easily create original content (wow there's a novel idea) and make a post on his own account with all of this information.
Instead he spams peoples hard work.
Well clearly he went to far....and he has been officially treated as a spammer...as he should be.
But lot's of voting bots add comment about the upvote too - how's that not spam, while aggregated info about total amount of bid bots usage is?
because its voluntary, your bot's comments are unsolicited
who decides what qualifies as "spam". You call the information he provides as "spam" based on whose definition of spam ? I mean, what prevents you from calling my comment "spam" for instance ? It's your content and I'm giving an unsolicited comment here ... so by one theory at least I am spamming as you were spamming cardboard and initially booster's post as well ... Just to understand who decides what is spam ...
The owner of the original post determines what is spam in their comments.
Little late to the party with this comment btw....only by like 2 months.
The owner of the bot has since created an "opt-out" version and I know longer give a fuck since he is no longer spamming my content.
That's because I didn't care about "the party". I'm sorry for the platform because the controversy surely hasn't helped. But the question about what is spam and who decides what is spam I find an interesting one. Someone's spam is someone else's free speech and freedom of expression. A government could accuse the media revealing a corruption scandal as "spamming" .... or not ?
Every single individual....defines spam...as it is to them.
It's not rocket science.