There's no irony, Katy. My occasional emails to the list, in response
to other members' posts, might in your mind be closer to your own
definition of spam mail, but any good social scientist should show first
the evidence that this is the view of "most people's" definition before
taking it upon themselves to speak on their behalf. Nevertheless, I'm
sure there are a few other intolerant subscribers who think as you do.
Have a nice day,
Paul Ashton
On 09/12/2014 17:23, Katherine Wright wrote:
> Paul: Perhaps you fail to see the irony of your email. Your regular troll-like emails to this mailing list are much closer to most people's definition of spam email - this mailing list involves emails informing you of publications and other things which might be of interest. If this annoys you, perhaps you shouldn't be on the list. If you want to complain about it, you should contact the people responsible for the specific emails which annoy you rather than sending them to everyone on the list. I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one who appreciated this.
>
> All the best
> Katy Wright
>
> Dr Katy Wright
> Postdoctoral Research Fellow (Bauman Institute)
> Room 11.12
> School of Sociology and Social Policy
> University of Leeds
> LS2 9JT
>
> 0113 343 8890
> [log in to unmask]
>
> For information about the Bauman Institute: www.sociology.leeds.ac.uk/bauman
> ________________________________________
> From: Social-Policy is run by SPA for all social policy specialists [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Ashton [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 09 December 2014 17:21
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Now out: Why we can't afford the rich by Andrew Sayer
>
> Yes, you mentioned it before in your marketing spam of 28 November.
>
> Paul Ashton
>
> On 09/12/2014 14:28, Kathryn King wrote:
> APOLOGIES FOR CROSS-POSTING
>
> Now Out:
> Why we can’t afford the rich
> Andrew Sayer
|