I guess I got an answer

The diagnose is obvious. Just block the wacky posters and enjoy what is left. I get 20 posts a day
tops, w/o counting the spam.

"m nesbitt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I asked, a while back, whether this place serves a purpose.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Baldrick said:

The diagnose is obvious. Just block the wacky posters and enjoy what is left. I get 20 posts a day
tops, w/o counting the spam.

While rotting in the stink of your own reflections -- god forbid you should ever have to encounter a
contrary opinion.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always
correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my
shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

Quoted message said:

"m nesbitt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I asked, a while back, whether this place serves a purpose.

"David Wright" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article said:

The diagnose is obvious. Just block the wacky posters and enjoy what is left. I get 20 posts a
day tops, w/o counting the spam.

While rotting in the stink of your own reflections -- god forbid you should ever have to encounter
a contrary opinion.

Good one Dave. I agree with you on that.

I reckon most of the spam dispersed to the pubic is to get them to go along with restrictions on
the internet.

Carole austarmetro.com.aumedia.htmOpen ↗

In article <[email hidden]>,

Carole said:

"David Wright" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article said:

The diagnose is obvious. Just block the wacky posters and enjoy what is left. I get 20 posts a
day tops, w/o counting the spam.

While rotting in the stink of your own reflections -- god forbid you should ever have to
encounter a contrary opinion.

Good one Dave. I agree with you on that.

I reckon most of the spam dispersed to the pubic is to get them to go along with restrictions on
the internet.

I sure hope you mean "public" in the foregoing. :-)

In any case, I disagree with you -- most of the spam is attempting to sell products of
dubious value.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always
correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my
shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

(David Wright) said:

In article said:

"David Wright" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Baldrick <[email hidden]> wrote:
>The diagnose is obvious. Just block the wacky posters and enjoy what is left. I get 20 posts a
>day tops, w/o counting the spam.

While rotting in the stink of your own reflections -- god forbid you should ever have to
encounter a contrary opinion.

Good one Dave. I agree with you on that.

I reckon most of the spam dispersed to the pubic is to get them to go along with restrictions on
the internet.

I sure hope you mean "public" in the foregoing. :-)

Quoted message said:

In any case, I disagree with you -- most of the spam is attempting to sell products of
dubious value.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always
correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my
shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

--
Peter Bowditch
The Millenium Project ratbags.comrsolesOpen ↗
The Green Light ratbags.comgreenlightOpen ↗
and The New Improved Quintessence of the Loon with added Vitamins and C-Q10 ratbags.comloonOpen ↗
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

[email hidden] (David Wright) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I reckon most of the spam dispersed to the pubic is to get them to go along with restrictions on
the internet.

I sure hope you mean "public" in the foregoing. :-)

Yeah, I meant "public" not pubic. That was a typo.

Quoted message said:

In any case, I disagree with you -- most of the spam is attempting to sell products of
dubious value.

I'm not too sure about that, for a couple of reasons.
(1) Remember back a couple of months ago when that Microsoft spam was doing the rounds with arriving
emails being 157K in size? At the same time all the other spam dropped off, then when the ISPs
figured out a program to screen it out, the other stuff started turning up again.

(2) If the emails are meant to attract people to buy stuff, how come some of them are so poorly
written and put together so seemingly in haste?

There is no doubt a percentage of genuine spam trying to sell stuff, but basically my thinking is
that possibly it is part of a plan to reduce free speech on the internet by getting people to get so
sick of spam, they will agree to some sort of restrictions.

You can't prove I'm wrong, except by saying something like "who is they?" and "you're paranoid" or
something like that.

Carole austarmetro.com.aumedia.htmOpen ↗

[email hidden] (Carole) wrote in
:"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

(2) If the emails are meant to attract people to buy stuff, how come some of them are so poorly
written and put together so seemingly in haste?

That's because the real money in spamming doesn't come from spamming for your own products (hardly
anyone makes money that way), it comes from selling spam software and e-mail lists to suckers who
think they can market their own products that way. It's really a lot like MLM, where the money isn't
in product sales, it's in getting other people into the program, and most of the people involved
have no sales skills at all. A sucker spams and his ISP shuts him down, but by the time they do the
people selling spam tools will have found tens or hundreds more suckers.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Carole said:

[email hidden] (David Wright) wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I reckon most of the spam dispersed to the pubic is to get them to go along with restrictions on
the internet.

I sure hope you mean "public" in the foregoing. :-)

Yeah, I meant "public" not pubic. That was a typo.

Quoted message said:

In any case, I disagree with you -- most of the spam is attempting to sell products of
dubious value.

I'm not too sure about that, for a couple of reasons.
(1) Remember back a couple of months ago when that Microsoft spam was doing the rounds with
arriving emails being 157K in size? At the same time all the other spam dropped off, then when
the ISPs figured out a program to screen it out, the other stuff started turning up again.

Your version of history is so much more entertaining than the truth. No wonder you prefer
your version.

Quoted message said:

(2) If the emails are meant to attract people to buy stuff, how come some of them are so poorly
written and put together so seemingly in haste?

Because the people who send them out are morons. And I have no doubt that a lot of them can't
deliver what they claim to deliver. I refuse to believe there are *that* many sites selling Vicodin.
Rush Limbaugh would never have had to get his maid to score the stuff for him if that were true.

Quoted message said:

There is no doubt a percentage of genuine spam trying to sell stuff, but basically my thinking is
that possibly it is part of a plan to reduce free speech on the internet by getting people to get
so sick of spam, they will agree to some sort of restrictions.

Ah, I should have realized you'd manage to drag in a conspiracy.

Never attribute to evil anything that is adequately explained by stupidity. You'll be right a lot
more often that way.

Quoted message said:

You can't prove I'm wrong, except by saying something like "who is they?" and "you're paranoid" or
something like that.

I can't "prove" you're wrong, but you are doing a ghastly job of proving you even might be right.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always
correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my
shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

"David Wright" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Carole writ
There is no doubt a percentage of genuine spam trying to sell stuff, but basically my thinking is
that possibly it is part of a plan to reduce free speech on the internet by getting people to get
so sick of spam, they will agree to some sort of restrictions.

Ah, I should have realized you'd manage to drag in a conspiracy.

Never attribute to evil anything that is adequately explained by stupidity.

I thought it was "Never attribute to Alice..." But I don;'t know who she was or who penned
the phrase.

Le M. 3