15 May 17:30
Re: Horrible record
From: Joel Hahn <jhahn@...>
Subject: Re: Horrible record
Newsgroups: gmane.education.libraries.autocat
Date: 2008-05-15 15:30:30 GMT
Subject: Re: Horrible record
Newsgroups: gmane.education.libraries.autocat
Date: 2008-05-15 15:30:30 GMT
Janet Hill wrote: > Hank Young wrote: > Just last week one of our senior Public Services > Librarians made an impassioned plea to a group of mostly > catalogers to "Please reduce the amount of OCLC spam" she > gets when doing a search in Worldcat. > ----- > > My comment about the message above is not exactly about > cataloging, but it > is tenuously related to it. It's about misuse of the term > SPAM. Spam is > not just stuff you don't want to see. It is stuff sent out > deliberately for commercial purposes, or occasionally on > purpose to disrupt the > business/lives of others. Because I'm also feeling pedantic this morning: The origin of this sense of the the word "spam" is the Monty Python "Spam Spam Spam Eggs and Spam" routine, which had nothing whatsoever to do with unsolicited commercial e-mail. In Internet parlance, "spam" has always meant, as a verb, to flood a resource with unwanted data, or as a noun, a datum used in such a flood. See the Jargon File at <http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/S/spam.html> This definition is applied to unsolicited commercial e-mail not because of its commercial nature, but because it's so darn hard to find the *real* e-mail amidst the onslaught of junk mail.(Continue reading)
RSS Feed