If you received junk mail with the regularity that you receive spam e-mail, would you say the same thing? If the post office began to charge you for the added weight of its deliveries? If you often couldn't tell the junk mail apart from the rest without opening it? If the majority of it was pornographic or a scam, and you couldn't do anything but grin and bear it?

I think Dave pretty accurately summed up why it's not just the nuisance factor:

Whenever people start complaining about spam, someone, often a spammer, will note that individual spams are easily dealt with—how hard is it to hit the delete key? That misses the point, of course. Repeatedly deleting unwanted messages is annoying, but what about the time I spent downloading it? The storage space my ISP used to store it until I checked my mail? The network bandwidth between me and the spammer? If 50% of the messages being sent through e-mail are noise, that means that the network providers have paid for twice as much capacity as they need.

As for the dada-esque post, I assumed he was referring to "Norma". Unless there was an aircraft carrier post that I missed.