Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
>I agree. > >It might have been a stupid thing to do (I mean, $245 for every email >sent? How the hell could they track this? Especially if you use clients? >How will they know who to send checks to? How could they prevent this >being abused?).... :) ... and yet, we have a person here who believed it, and this person may actually have access to serious machinery, like automobiles and guns. > >It was stupid, but not worthy of a ban... If this spam were his first-ever post, the listadmin would bump him off without a second thought, and we'd have no complaints about that. It's simple, and it's done every day in thousands of lists worldwide. Does anybody disagree with that assessment of the situation? So the punishment for spamming a list, especially with this sort of spam, is ejection, pure and simple. But I'm not saying that this is what's going to happen in this case. Because on the opposite side of punishment is a combination of mercy and forgiveness, often heaped together under the heading of "slack." Examples of slack in this case: Unlike my normal procedures that I follow with the dozens of pieces of normal spam I get every day, I did NOT report this to his ISP and their upstream provider. I also did NOT report it to the various FTC and other entities that collect examples of chain mail fraud. I gave him that amount of slack, even though HE DELIBERATELY LIED TO ALL OF US twice already within his Subject: header. In the interest of slack, he won't be bumped from his ISP from any action by me, even though that's undoubtedly their policy in such situations. And I imagine he won't be bumped from this list. But we SHOULD rub his nose in it. If he's so incredibly dim that he goes for an ancient (by net standards) chain letter that most people say "Nobody's dumb enough to fall for that!" to, then how do we know that he'll realize he's committed an offense here? --- * just-john@just-john.com http://just-john.com/cn/rfe.shtml *