Back to tweet spamming question

Having complied with MAYDAY's request that I change my blog URL name (see Transition to new URL name), I wish to return to my tweet spamming and the discussion of the same in Do you agree with the MAYDAY Team?

The MAYDAY Team has had this further to say by email:

As far as spamming, spam is specifically defined as unwelcome, and widely perceived as unethical. Congress has even passed laws against much spam because it is so unwelcome and unpopular. The lack of even a few comments on your blog should be an indication to you that your Tweeting is "unwanted or intrusive advertising on the Internet," as the definition of spam goes.

I can only repeat that my tweeting has attracted a great deal of positive interest from MAYDAY supporters and supporters of other campaign finance reform organizations. This interest has been manifested by hundreds of retweets, favoritings, follows, and other favorable reply tweets from recipients, and also by thousands of page views of links to my blog that I have been tweeting. (A partial listing of blog entries and numbers of page views is set forth in Do you agree with the MAYDAY Team? .)

As to numerous favorable reply tweets I received expressing interest in my ideas and suggestions, I sent reply tweets to the senders to further encourage the their interest, and I included @MAYDAYUS as a recipient so MAYDAY could see the interest and do its own encouragement of the senders.. To my knowledge, MAYDAY made no encouragement of any of those senders.

I acknowledge that some people have strong negative reactions to receiving unsolicited tweets from tweeters they do not know, and some people I have tweeted to may have decided to oppose campaign finance reform because I tweeted to them.

The negative reactions, however, have been minuscule, and the favorable reactions I have received from my tweeting, in my view, far, far outweigh the negative reactions.

The MAYDAY Team can and should estimate the negative side to my tweeting, and weigh that against its estimate of the benefit of my tweeting inspiring greater interest and activism by MAYDAY supporters and other campaign finance reformers. In doing that estimating and weighing, the MAYDAY Team is entitled, it it wants, to conclude it does not want me (or presumably anyone else) to do spam tweeting such as I have been doing.

Keep in mind that the estimating and weighing of positives and negatives of the tweeting I am advocated ultimately needs to be extended to the matter of spreading the MAYDAY name and the cause of campaign finance reform to the public generally. 

I replied to the email I received from the MAYDAY Team referred to above, to the effect that, if MAYDAY wanted no part of my tweet spamming, I would point that out to MAYDAY supporters as a reason they should not spend their time within the confines of what MAYDAY specifies and they should go outside MAYDAY to seek activity, including with other campaign finance reform organizations. to engage in more aggressive publicizing of the campaign finance reform cause.