🚀 go-pugleaf

Sandra D.Helbig wrote:
> 
> 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,

> >Thomas G. Spalthoff                 "Moderation seems to be the key"
> >tgs@planet.ho.att.com                                    J. Buffett


Sandra,
	Please note that AT&T and Lucent are NOT the same company; they
originated from the same company but are no longer the same.  Please
direct your critisizm correctly.

Dave 

--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
-- David Potts              Views and Beliefs are my own, and do not --
-- Lucent Technologies      represent Lucent Technologies in any way --
-- (Bell Labs Innovations)  shape or form.                           --
-- davidp@lucent.com                                                 --
--								     --
-- Remove the _ in my address to reply, it is there to stop	     --
-- automatic mailers						     --
--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--

helbig@ix.netcom.com(Sandra D.Helbig) writes:

>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.

Such nonsense.  Sigh.

First.  Unsolicited telephone solicitation (referred to as "spam" in
the post) is frowned upon by the FTC.  Callres are _required_ to 
cease calling you if you request them to.  They can be prosecuted
for not doing so.

Second.  Unsolicited commercial email and similar postings to newsgroups
do not "pay the freight".  They are, in factm theft of system resources
by the poster.  Their cost to all parts of the Internet _other_ that the poster
is considerable.  On to of that, many, like myself, have a committment 
never to patronize a company that engages in such practices.
-- 
Geoffrey Leach          C/C++/X11/Motif Implementation
geoff@netcom.com        Mountain Ranch Software
			12846 Whiskey Slide Road
                        Mountain Ranch CA  95246-0336
                        209-754-1869

Sandra D.Helbig (helbig@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: 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.

What a bunch of self-serving horseshit.  The web doesn't invade my
mailbox and my mailing lists, counselor, nor does it force me to pay
for transmission of your cheezy ad copy.  Your spam doesn't pay my bills.
What your spam does is annoy me and cost me time and effort purging
your obnoxious, unwanted and irrelevant bankruptcy ads from a
mailing list bridged to one of the regional newsgroups you spam, one
which was created and is chartered "NONCOMMERCIAL -- NO ADVERTISING!",
as are most of the newsgroups you abuse.  Your spam has cost me time
and money building and maintaining SMTP and mailing list firewalls
to keep you and your ilk off my private network where you are definitely
not welcome.  In my book, you are no better than thieves who break
into computers in order to abuse them, except I have some measure
of respect for the skills of talented hackers, which none of you
are.  You're just shameless opportunists -- hypocrits looking for a
free ride at everyone else's expense.

Your spam benefits you and you alone, Ms. Helbig, although one has
to wonder about how much any of you spammers actually benefit from
it.  I can't imagine the gullible nose-pickers who must respond to
such an amateur form of advertising.  OTOH, I have no such doubts
about the ethics and quality of service I could expect to find with
someone who feels it's his or her right to arrogantly ignore
long-standing Usenet rules of use and annoy so many people in such
inappropriate forums.

: Where do you get the idea
: that a customer who pays an internet provider is subject to censorship
: by that internet provider?

And where do you get the idea that an ISP can't set rules and
standards of conduct for its customers which it can enforce by
terminating the contract with that customer?  You're supposedly
a lawyer; I presume you know about contracts.

As for your AT&T metaphor, nice try but no cigar.  Usenet spamming isn't
telephone solicitation.  It's an electronically propogated form of
junkmail advertising, making it more like unsolicited fax advertising which,
as you know, is quite illegal.