<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
You, bloody moron. Is not most email unsolicited.<br>
<br>
I never asked you to send an email,<br>
Your message is off topic,<br>
Your getting rude,<br>
therefor <b>YOU</b> are a spammer.<br>
<br>
Now, in the name of all that is decent, drop this thread. Lets get
back to what we are all here for,<br>
<b>discussing Asterisk</b>.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Christopher Dobbs<br>
Systems Manager<br>
Eracew Computer Services<br>
<br>
Joe Greco wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid200411240211.iAO2B1pD097431@aurora.sol.net"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Tue, 2004-11-23 at 19:06 -0600, Joe Greco wrote:
[..snip..]
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On the flip side, senders of spam should not expect recipients to go
to much (or any) trouble on their behalf, especially given the current
spam environment on the 'net. They - not hackerwaCker - blew the
surprise by sending the message to recipients unknown.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">I'll just summarise all you said into one conclusion which remains the
same as to what Steven said: hackerwanker is a moron.
:-)
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
No, that's not what I said. If you want the short, brutal summary, it'd
be:
The spammer who sent the message is the moron.
Really, there are all sorts of bizarre phishing schemes and other scams out
on the 'net. If you go asking random people for donations, and cannot put
the request in the context of solid well-knowns, such as an organization or
individual who is clearly legitimate, then it looks quite possibly like a
scam of some sort, and posting it to the list isn't exactly unreasonable -
it's more like a "watch out for this scam" community service.
However, we also have to remember that even being a well-known wouldn't make
it right to send unsolicited bulk e-mail.
So.
It's unfortunate (for the people trying to organize the gift) that
hackerwacker sent an alert to the list. It's not unusual, though. As
service providers, many of us actively encourage customers to put a stop
to abuses of the mail system such as chain letters and other scams by
asking people to take active countermeasures. I'd consider this to be
an example of just such a countermeasure.
It seems fitting that spammers should not have their goals furthered by the
act of spamming. It would seem that this is precisely what happened in
this case.
I'll further note that I did receive a copy of the spam in question. While
I did not choose to complain to the relevant sites about it, or to post a
message to the mailing list, the Boulder Pledge is certainly applicable -
I will not be contributing towards a gift effort that spammed.
... JG
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>