[redmen]

Ummmm a spammer is a person who must create many accounts to game the system. If there was no login requirement they could spam in other ways, for example voting, on YouTube: views. Scraping is a huge part of spamming. First you need to identify what you are going to do, which audience you are going to go after.

I'm not sure if you are trolling or just being overly pedantic to argue for the sake of arguing or what but it's tiring.

Spammers scrape data and sell it to other spammers who do other actions.

When you come in with an intent to disprove you're going to be looking for holes in what someone says rather than focusing on the value. That's one of the main problems with the web and the world these days.

[thaumasiotes]

> Ummmm a spammer is a person who must create many accounts to game the system.

No, that's not what a spammer is.

> Scraping is a huge part of spamming.

No, it isn't.

[redmen]

Lol you really don't know much about this topic. Sorry if I am sounding rude but you just revealed that with yet another response looking simply to be right and prove me wrong without any actual thought.

In the context in which we are talking, yes indeed a spammer needs to create accounts to dm people, upvote, retweet,.etc etc etc.

You might be thinking of email or something, which is a different type of spam in a different context.

Again, please try to stay positive and look for value rather than just simply trying to win.

A Twitter spammer creates many accounts, scrapes to identify an audience, follows and unfollows to build their audience, DMs, tweets, etc for the purpose of making money.

There, are there any more blanks that you want me to fill? Or can I go back to living in peace and speaking with people who aren't trying to poke holes in everything.

P.S. sorry to anyone having to read this drivel. But I feel the need to defend when people come in here with an intent to argue for the sake of arguing and showing zero intent to listen or understand.