🚀 go-pugleaf

Hey Spalthoff,

There you are, sitting at your work computer at Lucent in Holmdel,
N.J., with nothing better to do than abuse people that are gainfully
employed earning a living while you are killing time using your
corporate internet connection and company computer.  While you were
cranking out your nonsense on the computer as an employee of AT&T, AT&T
was "spamming" the world with telephone calls (I personally have
received many of these telephone calls which interrupted my work),
"spamming" the world with advertisement (ad nauseam on TV), and now
various "Bell" companies are soliciting me via email.  I have heard now
that AT&T will be sending people DOOR TO DOOR ringing doorbells and
infringing on people's privacy to sell telephone services.   Do I see a
little hypocrisy here?

Come off it.  Commercial endeavors pay the bills.  Spamming pays your
salary.  Spam is good.  Spam is great. The vast majority of people on
the web are engaged in for profit endeavors.  You would recognize this
too if you had any real world experience outside your corporate
culture.  These people who are spamming have more going for them than
you ever will.

And you have a typical corporate mindset.  Where do you get the idea
that a customer who pays an internet provider is subject to censorship
by that internet provider?  Only a corporate drone would believe that a
telecommunication organization has the right (nay the duty) to dictate
what is wrongspeak and wrongthought by the peons it deigns to permit to
pay to use its services. AT&T and various Bell companies are expanding
into internet services.  The logical conclusion to be drawn from your
activities is that AT&T and its affiliates plan to censor paying
customers who use their internet services.  Interesting concept.  I
wonder how it will work in the real world of business.

You look awfully young to be telling people what to do, expecting them
to do it, and then becoming distraught when people won't obey you.  Do
you really want to live in a "1984" run by a big brother
telecommunication giant?  Silly question, of course you do.  Well, I
don't and I suspect the world doesn't either.

Well, I just want you to know that every time I am "spammed" by AT&T
and various Bell companies whether by email, telephone, whatever, I
will mention your name and what you do and ask them, that in view of
what you do, how do they think I should react to them.  

I would suggest that anyone who is "spammed" by AT&T and other Bell
companies to specifically mention Mr. Spalthoff by name and describe
his activities attacking legimate business advertising.

Sandra D. Helbig
lawpage@access.digex.net

You wrote: 
>
>In article <56smjp$k7c@nntp1.best.com>, marcus@vestek.com (Mark Robert
Stephen) wrote:
>>dlmiller@inetdirect.net (Doug & Rose Miller) wrote:
>>
>>>.. you can do what I did: forward it to the sender's Internet
Service
>> Provider,
>>>in this case to "abuse@ix.netcom.com". Netcom doesn't like having
its
>>>service used in this manner.
>>
>>
>>That is a good idea. You could also try: 
>>
>>'webmaster@whateverprovider.com', or
>> 'postmaster@whateverprovider.com'
>>
>>these will usualyl work as well.
>
>Actually, they don't.  Usually, spammers do a fairly good job of
manipulating 
>headers so that you can't easily tell where a message is coming from. 
Most 
>often, the address or web site listed in the body of spam has nothing
to do 
>with the origination of the message (other than the person pushing the

>buttons).
>
>Check out http://kryten.eng.monash.edu.au/gspam.html for some tools to
figure 
>out where something is coming from.  Yahoo also has a fairly extensive
list of 
>resources to help combat this garbage.  I've set up a page with all
the spam 
>sent to me - check it out if you're really bored 
>(www.umdnj.edu/~spalthof/listofshame.html).
>
>--Tom
>
>Thomas G. Spalthoff                 "Moderation seems to be the key"
>tgs@planet.ho.att.com                                    J. Buffett