🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2p60ab$1c6k@locutus.rchland.ibm.com> BillSeurer@vnet.ibm.com writes:
>In article <1994Apr20.203244.19212@mprgate.mpr.ca>, vanderby@mprgate.mpr.ca (David Vanderbyl) writes:
>|> In article <2p3b9c$vuo@locutus.rchland.ibm.com>, seurer@nordruth.rchland.ibm.com (Bill Seurer) writes:
>|> |> Before responding consider that you may be putting your auto at risk of
>|> |> theft.
>|> 
>|> I'll assume you meant *increased* risk of theft, since your auto is
>|> already at risk of theft (it's parked, isn't it :-) ) .
>|> 
>|> How do you arrive at this conclusion?  Don't you realize that anyone
>|> can look through your front windshield and get the VIN?  And how the
>|> heck is this guy going to find your car after you give him the VIN?
>
>Let's see.  I am an auto theft and I am looking for, oh, Mercedes (one of
>the examples he used).  I post a message here and get a nice long list of
>them.  Using the poster's names I look up their addresses and voila!

I have an easier method.  I look around and see a Mercedes parked.  What
if I don't see any?  Well -- hmmm.  I'll go over to Beverly Hills/
Scarsdale/Princeton/Brookline or wherever there _are_ a lot of Mercedes
parked.  The hassle of collecting the information seems to be greater
than the value of the information.

My guess is that the poster wanted to *test* the VIN decoder to assure
him or herself that the program was working correctly.  There are far
easier ways of stealing a car.  Everyone is so paranoid.....  (Now if it
were a computer survey I'd worry a little).

Gary
-- 
Gary L Hewitt                          glhewitt@phoenix.princeton.edu

This .signature has been stolen!  Reward offered for its safe return.