I don't consider an ad (really a notice) for a relevant book to be crap.

I don't see anybody railing about the recent ads for loan consolidation
or prostitutes.

IME it is somewhat unusual nowadays to see much reaction to ads on
Usenet.  Maybe that is due to anti-spam mechanisms that automatically
cancel excessive multiple posts and excessive cross posts.  So the
problem is greatly reduced, and advertisements are often one-off or
occasional ads relevant to the groups in which they appear.  The rest
are ignored most of the time.  I don't think it is very unusual for some
ads to be permitted in moderated groups.

IME crapflooding is the far greater problem nowadays, thankfully not
that I've seen yet in this group.  I don't know that ISP toleration of
it has much to do with the revenue they would lose by cutting off the
perpetrators.  Mostly I think they don't give much of a hoot, or maybe
they are waiting for a software solution.

It's not much, but I read that AOL green-card ad the hour it was posted.
    I use a different mnemonic for cross product.

You might want to take a look at what  the MDS sheets the dentists get
say before they hide them from you...hint ( the wordsCOntRAindEEcated
and amalgam used to be used a lot!) The BEST information you've
received on this newsgroup is about the Hg content of fillings...your
just too ignorant to know
it.

[I didn't want to clip out any portions so I didn't!]

Before "these days", there were the "old days" when lots of crazy
battles were waged by zealots of many varieties.  I participated in some
activities that are no longer "necessary" (in smd) in order to get the
attention of the audience (lurkers and posters) and with a deep desire
to encourage valuable discussion on a particular subject that involves
dentistry and medicine.  Thinking about it now, if I went back into the
"old days" with all things equal, there isn't anything I wouldn't do
(again) just as I did then because it was done for all the correct
reasons; as unattractive as much of it was.  

It was a frontier back when I arrived (1994).  This newsgroup was very
young and we were all younger then... ;-)  (Some of us are no longer
living.) What I ended up doing with my ideas in the end, was not at all
what I had originally envisioned.  As they say, there is more than one
way to skin a cat. (Poor cat.)  It was the message or messages that I
was *driven* to find a way to deliver... and I did.

All in all, I was ultimately able to influence some people in the
newsgroup (and beyond) by sensitizing them to see certain serious issues
through their profession's patients' eyes.  What we all saw in order to
create that vision was not a pretty sight.  But it was an important one.  
And as a result, I *believe* that if some people accused me of
"spamming" the newsgroup in order to censor my speech by getting my ISPs
to shut me down ... then so be it.  It was a price that had to be paid
for a cause that I believed was critically important to the dentists and
their patients.  And, *so what* if people called me "names" and tried to
assassinate my character!  The fight wasn't for me; I was willing to be
the facilitator and the messenger who came armed with experiences not
ordinarily known nor experienced by dental professionals.  The fight was
for everyone in an effort to understand how certain calamities result
and how all involved suffer in their own ways. In the end, I (with help
from my co-contributor/co-author) had  completed a project in a way that
could never have been done in the days before sci.med.dentistry (and
alt.support.jaw-disorders) existed (that being the older old days). It
was an imperfect literary project that came from an equally imperfect
world.  

IMHO, all "spam" is not created equal.  When I see my opinion of "spam",
I ignore it, delete it, and once in awhile I even report it. For some,
reporting "spam" was a weapon to fight against freedom of speech.

I guess that's enough about that.

Webby