Using abuse to fight abuse (especially when the abuser you're fighting against is abusive because they don't know any better, which is quite often the case) is counter-productive. It gives the impression that the Usenet admins are an uncontrolled mob in the middle of a riot, not caring who or what we destroy as we go along.
     This is not something which can continue. The only chance we've got of actually putting a stop to spammers and their ilk is to show that the anti-spam activists of the 'net are not merely some juvenile rabble.
     We understand the technology, we understand the culture, and we have dozens of documents explaining why spam is bad. It's all there if we can get people to listen. But you can NOT get people to listen by trying to destroy their livelihood!

     I know spam is bad. I've been tempted to mailbomb or pingflood people many times (and I could do it real damn well, too -- no problems with bandwidth from where I'm sitting.) But one of the main tenets we state when Chris Lewis or others are accused of censorship is that it is always done impartially, with no attention paid to content.
     Net abuse should be treated the same way: abuse is abuse, with no attention paid to intent.