[ale] Matrimonial --> spam problem

Frank Zamenski fzamenski at voyager.net
Mon Sep 25 19:12:51 EDT 2000



Rod,

One big difference is that the paper spam stuffers pay postage per mailout.
Maybe reduced bulk rates, but they are paying something nonetheless.
E-spammers make everyone else pay for their transport, they use the net for
free (sans their ISP connection fee) and can use it to much greater extent
than any paying paper spammer ever will the snail routes. But ain't no free
lunch, even on the 'net. In effect they are stealing from the rest of us.
Think about all the spam shooting around stealing your share of the
bandwidth next time you have a lousy connection to some favorite site.
(Okay, so lots of mp3s are shooting around, too, but, that's another issue.
;-)

What DoS is "equiv to an ip pickett line"? Hmm, spam also forms a pickett
line of sorts. It hinders the passage of legit packets. Thus, spam == DoS! A
stretch? Maybe not...

--fgz


> From: "Rod Young" <development at combiz.net>
> Sent: Monday, September 25, 2000 8:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [ale] Matrimonial --> spam problem


> It is interesting that is legal to stuff the bussines reply envelops that
junk
> mailers use with worthles paper, but you cant do he same in cyber space.
Also I
> saw one argument that one type of DOS was eqivelent to an ip pickett line.
The
> poster argue that that should legal too. Just some thoughts and its all
overmy
> head.
>
> Frank Zamenski wrote:
>
> > Tempting. And indeed maybe illegal, although I'm not a lawyer nor do I
play
> > one on TV. It's also just plain unethical, unprofessional, and
contributes
> > to bandwidth waste. (Although there IS a limit! ;-)
> >
> > As is known, tough to trace them down, and when caught, the ratfinks
often
> > come back anyway.
> >
> > Could make it a federal crime, first-time offense punishable by 24/7/30
> > cuffed in front of a computer to read all the spam anyone cares to
forward
> > to the offender. I think that'd quickly end it. If not, toss the repeat
> > offender into a deep lake then throw him a life buoy... of hardcopy
> > spam-in-a-sack! Fast, efficient, humane, effective.... and darn
righteous,
> > too! (Albeit for a while lake must be dredged daily of icky-poo spam
> > remnants, for lake to remain functional as deterrent factor.)
> >
> > Else, cooler heads might find a practical solution....
> >
> > --fgz
> >
> > > From: "Rod Young" <development at combiz.net>
> > > Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2000 11:53 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [ale] Matrimonial --> spam problem
> > >
> >
> > > What are the ethics of just overloading their mail ststem with
scripts.
> > > I know that may seem gosh or even be illeagle. But so should spamming.
> > >
> > > Frank Zamenski wrote:
> > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Jonathan Rickman" <jonathan at xcorps.net>
> > > > To: <ale at ale.org>
> > > > Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2000 8:55 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [ale] Matrimonial
> > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 24 Sep 2000, Aiswarya wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We  have pleasure to  invite you to visit  the  biggest  and
fast
> > > > growing   Indian  matrimonial website.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >                       http://www.Indiaoptions.com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > OK...I can only take so much. Maybe it is about time to look into
some
> > > > > spam blocking for the list. This has gotten a bit out of hand over
the
> > > > > last few days. It's just a matter of time before they subscribe to
the
> > > > > list and start harvesting member addresses. At that point I'm
afraid
> > the
> > > > > list might die a slow death, and I'd really hate to see that
happen.
> > > > > --
> > > > > Jonathan Rickman
> > > > > X Corps Security
> > > > > http://www.xcorps.net
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I agree. The last thing I want is to be harvested by more idiot
> > spammers.
> > > > Yet
> > > > this spamming trend may lead to two distasteful choices:
unsubscribe,
> > or,
> > > > the
> > > > useage of a bogus address. Leaving would make me feel like I gave in
to
> > the
> > > > low-lifes, which would just irk the hell out of me! But I also don't
> > want to
> > > > feel
> > > > like I have to 'hide' within an otherwise high-caliber and
professional
> > list
> > > > like
> > > > this one, either.
> > > >
> > > > --fgz
> > > >
> > > > --


--
To unsubscribe: mail majordomo at ale.org with "unsubscribe ale" in message body.





More information about the Ale mailing list