Seen Top Gear/Panorama?????.... and want to import your own NEW car
thousands of pounds cheaper? We arrange everything to make it possible,
with a weekend in Amsterdam included.
Reply to
UK AND IRELAND ONLY
--
Hey, Toby, whats twisting your knickers !!!
There is no way I would I would describe the original posting as "mass
distribution of junk mail". The guy was offering a genuine service in a low
key way in an appropriate news group. What is wrong with that?
Perhaps you work for VW U.K????
Chris Hall.
any
Quoted text (7 lines)
>Yahoo! Mail Terms of Service Agreement reads: >"... C. You agree not to use the service for the transmission of >"junk mail", "spam", "chain letters", or unsolicited mass distribution of >email. > D. You agree that Yahoo!, Four11 and their designees may in >their sole discretion terminate your account if they believe you have inQuoted text (21 lines)
>way violated the Terms of Service." >I included section D to let you know YAHOO.COM has been contacted and you >will be losing your account. >Luv ya! >>Seen Top Gear/Panorama?????.... and want to import your own NEW car >>thousands of pounds cheaper? We arrange everything to make it possible, >>with a weekend in Amsterdam included. >>Reply to >>UK AND IRELAND ONLY >>--Though some may have consider it useful (some consider free XXX passwords
useful) it still is in violation of their agreement with their email
provider. Period.
You are right, me knickers were a bit tweaked about me 'boys' as I received
more than my daily average of spam in email. Since I enjoy this NG for it's
VW content (some of you guys and gals are damn funny!) it really bugs me
when anyone spams our NG, particularly when they don't CONTRIBUTE to the
list except to promote their product. My actions are not limited to just
the NG but to spam I receive in my email as well. By the way, this is the
last post I'll make to the other NGs on this subject unless one of them
deserves a response.
Also, the spammer may have been offering a genuine service but I wouldn't
consider a "NEW car" offer applicable to .simulators, .rotary,
.rod-n-custom, and .aircooled (since VW makes new water-cooled cars I can
see it 'sliding' in). The only place it really belongs is in .marketplace
since that's where people would go if they wanted to buy a "NEW car".
Okay, you get the idea. No, I don't work for VW U.K. and you lost me on the
relevancy (???) but if I did I guarantee you that I would be an archive mole
and be getting as much air-cooled info as possible for everyone :)
Toby Erkson
'72 VW Squareback 1.6L bored and stroked to 2.0L, Berg five-speed
'75 Porsche 914 1.8L, ORPCA member
Portland, Oregon, http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/8501/
Quoted text (41 lines)
>Hey, Toby, whats twisting your knickers !!! >There is no way I would I would describe the original posting as "mass >distribution of junk mail". The guy was offering a genuine service in a low >key way in an appropriate news group. What is wrong with that? >Perhaps you work for VW U.K???? >Chris Hall. >>Yahoo! Mail Terms of Service Agreement reads: >>"... C. You agree not to use the service for the transmission of >>"junk mail", "spam", "chain letters", or unsolicited mass distribution of >>email. >> D. You agree that Yahoo!, Four11 and their designees may in >>their sole discretion terminate your account if they believe you have in >any >>way violated the Terms of Service." >>I included section D to let you know YAHOO.COM has been contacted and you >>will be losing your account. >>Luv ya! >>>Seen Top Gear/Panorama?????.... and want to import your own NEW car >>>thousands of pounds cheaper? We arrange everything to make it possible, >>>with a weekend in Amsterdam included. >>>Reply to >>>UK AND IRELAND ONLY >>>--Do the research. This post was generated by someone at worldonline.nl. Yahoo
has nothing to do with the post. If you want to stop these people, Copy the
FULL header onto a forward of the original post, and send it to
(http://www.worldonline.nl) Yahoo! does need to be contacted that an address
of theirs is being used in a commercial post, but this does not stop the
originator of said post.
Don.
(the stop spam page)
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/5265/
>Though some may have consider it useful (some consider free XXX passwords
>useful) it still is in violation of their agreement with their email
>provider. Period.
>You are right, me knickers were a bit tweaked about me 'boys' as I received
>more than my daily average of spam in email. Since I enjoy this NG for it's
the
>relevancy (???) but if I did I guarantee you that I would be an archive mole
low
Quoted text (14 lines)
>VW content (some of you guys and gals are damn funny!) it really bugs me >when anyone spams our NG, particularly when they don't CONTRIBUTE to the >list except to promote their product. My actions are not limited to just >the NG but to spam I receive in my email as well. By the way, this is the >last post I'll make to the other NGs on this subject unless one of them >deserves a response. >Also, the spammer may have been offering a genuine service but I wouldn't >consider a "NEW car" offer applicable to .simulators, .rotary, >.rod-n-custom, and .aircooled (since VW makes new water-cooled cars I can >see it 'sliding' in). The only place it really belongs is in .marketplace >since that's where people would go if they wanted to buy a "NEW car". >Okay, you get the idea. No, I don't work for VW U.K. and you lost me onQuoted text (14 lines)
>and be getting as much air-cooled info as possible for everyone :) > Toby Erkson > '72 VW Squareback 1.6L bored and stroked to 2.0L, Berg five-speed > '75 Porsche 914 1.8L, ORPCA member > Portland, Oregon, http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/8501/ >>Hey, Toby, whats twisting your knickers !!! >>There is no way I would I would describe the original posting as "mass >>distribution of junk mail". The guy was offering a genuine service in aQuoted text (37 lines)
>>key way in an appropriate news group. What is wrong with that? >>Perhaps you work for VW U.K???? >>Chris Hall. >>>Yahoo! Mail Terms of Service Agreement reads: >>>"... C. You agree not to use the service for the transmission of >>>"junk mail", "spam", "chain letters", or unsolicited mass distribution of >>>email. >>> D. You agree that Yahoo!, Four11 and their designees may in >>>their sole discretion terminate your account if they believe you have in >>any >>>way violated the Terms of Service." >>>I included section D to let you know YAHOO.COM has been contacted and you >>>will be losing your account. >>>Luv ya! >>>>Seen Top Gear/Panorama?????.... and want to import your own NEW car >>>>thousands of pounds cheaper? We arrange everything to make it possible, >>>>with a weekend in Amsterdam included. >>>>Reply to >>>>UK AND IRELAND ONLY >>>>--which they claim to have an opinion about:
Lets see, this is the usenet, news groups, how can it be considered
e-mail? mayhaps you're just a ***er?
F.R.E.D.
take _me_ out to respond....
Hey Lon,
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights do make a left! :-) But seriously,
I'm lost as to the point of your post. What are you trying to say? Is it:
A. It's okay for someone to break rules because others break rules?
B. We should not "turn in" someone because someone could "turn us in" and we
wouldn't like that?
C. We should only turn in those who Lon approves of.
D. All the above.
The way I see it, if someone breaks rules and we don't like it, it is our right to
turn them in. If we (or I) break rules and someone doesn't like it, it is their
right to turn us (or me) in. So you wouldn't call on a guy who displayed a little
"exhibition of speed". Okay, how about if he were obviously intoxicated and
weaving in and out of traffic? Would you make the call then, or would you say to
yourself "Well, I illegally parked somewhere today and I wouldn't want anyone
turning me in, and I once drove intoxicated, so I'll let this guy go on." How
about if he***d your mother?
My point is that we all tolerate, and even engage in, some amount of wrongdoing.
But at some point each of us draws the line. Where we draw the line is an choice,
and if one chooses to turn in a spammer (who violated his ISP agreement) that you
would not have, well it's his right. And the spammer took the risk of being turned
in.
I guess this makes the first bloke a Spam Cop, you a Spam Cop Cop, and me a Spam
Cop Cop Cop!!! ;-)
James the berzerk
Quoted text (29 lines)
> So, since it is OK for you to contact his service provider with > information that could revoke his use of their service, do you feel it > would be OK for someone living in your City contacting the Department of > Public Safety or the Law Inforcement Agency for any "violation" of your > "agreement" with the Department of Public Safety? You agreed to abide > by the law when you were issued your license, but I can bet with a bored > and stroked Type 3 and a 914 you might be apt to get on the throttle > alittle. > Do two wrongs make it right? So the guy "broke the rules" and it did > not settle well with you. Would you appreciate your name and license > plate numbers being given to the COPS when someone spotted you speeding > or demonstrating an "exhibition of exceleration" and didn't like it? I > don't think so! > I would just be happy it had to do with cars and not ***. > SPAM is everywhere and if you decide to be the SPAM-cop you will have a > long and tedious job ahead of you and alot of blame to throw around. > You won't be able to pick and choose who is wrong and who is right and > have to turn everyone in. > I can see complaining and "flaming" the guy, but to pull out the Yahoo > "code of ethics" is going a little too far. > -- > Test Engineering - Embedded Test phone:(972)952-3212 > Sensors and Electronic Systems ICBM:33d21'13"N 96d64'75"W > Raytheon Systems Company (formerly Raytheon TI Systems)I say again:
"Badges? We don't need no s***king badges!"
(not throwin' blame around... sending it right back where it came from.)
>Hey Lon,
>Two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights do make a left! :-) But seriously,
>I'm lost as to the point of your post. What are you trying to say? Is it:
>A. It's okay for someone to break rules because others break rules?
>B. We should not "turn in" someone because someone could "turn us in" and we
right to
>turn them in. If we (or I) break rules and someone doesn't like it, it is their
>right to turn us (or me) in. So you wouldn't call on a guy who displayed a little
>"exhibition of speed". Okay, how about if he were obviously intoxicated and
>weaving in and out of traffic? Would you make the call then, or would you say to
>yourself "Well, I illegally parked somewhere today and I wouldn't want anyone
>turning me in, and I once drove intoxicated, so I'll let this guy go on." How
>about if he***d your mother?
>My point is that we all tolerate, and even engage in, some amount of wrongdoing.
>But at some point each of us draws the line. Where we draw the line is an choice,
>and if one chooses to turn in a spammer (who violated his ISP agreement) that you
>would not have, well it's his right. And the spammer took the risk of being turned
>in.
>I guess this makes the first bloke a Spam Cop, you a Spam Cop Cop, and me a Spam
Quoted text (7 lines)
>wouldn't like that? >C. We should only turn in those who Lon approves of. >D. All the above. >The way I see it, if someone breaks rules and we don't like it, it is ourQuoted text (36 lines)
>Cop Cop Cop!!! ;-) >James the berzerk >> So, since it is OK for you to contact his service provider with >> information that could revoke his use of their service, do you feel it >> would be OK for someone living in your City contacting the Department of >> Public Safety or the Law Inforcement Agency for any "violation" of your >> "agreement" with the Department of Public Safety? You agreed to abide >> by the law when you were issued your license, but I can bet with a bored >> and stroked Type 3 and a 914 you might be apt to get on the throttle >> alittle. >> Do two wrongs make it right? So the guy "broke the rules" and it did >> not settle well with you. Would you appreciate your name and license >> plate numbers being given to the COPS when someone spotted you speeding >> or demonstrating an "exhibition of exceleration" and didn't like it? I >> don't think so! >> I would just be happy it had to do with cars and not ***. >> SPAM is everywhere and if you decide to be the SPAM-cop you will have a >> long and tedious job ahead of you and alot of blame to throw around. >> You won't be able to pick and choose who is wrong and who is right and >> have to turn everyone in. >> I can see complaining and "flaming" the guy, but to pull out the Yahoo >> "code of ethics" is going a little too far. >> -- >> Test Engineering - Embedded Test phone:(972)952-3212 >> Sensors and Electronic Systems ICBM:33d21'13"N 96d64'75"W >> Raytheon Systems Company (formerly Raytheon TI Systems)Again, I have to agree with James, and it is well put too, my friend.
As for the DMV vs ISP comparision, this is not really valid. If someone lays
a little *** on a country road, except for the raccoons (oh no, hope
Greenpeace isn't reading this), no one gets harmed. In spamming, it
overloads servers, wasted EXPENSIVE bandwidth, annoys people who want to
check their email only to have to wait for ***to d/l until they can get
the REAL messages, and in several cases I have recieved since joining this
NG, can be very offensive. I personally don't care to view ***agers having
sex, but at least 3 times a week I get spam inviting me too, my wife is not
impressed, and my 9 year old who reads everything he sets his eyes on
doesn't need to see it. Oh, and just for the record, I NEVER give my email
address out to web sites or strangers, and have not found the need to go
trolling for sex online, so don't even go there. So, if spamming didn't hurt
anyone, okay, go ahead, but it does, so I'm gonna report everyone I see.
Sneaks
Quoted text (8 lines)
> which they claim to have an opinion about: > >Though some may have consider it useful (some consider free XXX passwords > >useful) it still is in violation of their agreement with their email > >provider. Period. > Lets see, this is the usenet, news groups, how can it be considered > e-mail?Hey Lon,
To end this peacefully (which I feel never was vicious) I understand what you are
saying. I too don't mind auto related posts, such as a supplier announcing a new
catalog, etc. And I agree with if they posted frequently (being in the watercooled
group you missed my joust with a Sacramento car dealer over that issue) that would be
offensive. And yes, burning *** compared to*** is extreme, but that is only to
make the point (and very unfortunately there are those who think*** is no more of an
offense than burning ***) that we should not judge where others draw the line.
And I have benefitted in that regard. I was once nailed by the California Highway
Patrol doing 80 on a Harley. After admitting I had had one drink, they made me walk
the line, and passing they let me walk from the speed! (I think it was old cop
training a greenhorn and they were seeking a DUI) You can bet your bottom dollar I was
happy that instead of a citation (or worse, I could have been arrested for that severe
of a violation) I got to go home clean!
As to cutting someone off in traffic, just a few weeks ago two people in one car were
***ed in an act of road rage just a few miles from my house (no, it wasn't berzerk
little ol' me!). With an account like that, I'm damn thankful that we don't physically
see one another on the "Information Superhighway"!!!
Take care bro, I enjoyed the conversation. I hope it was likewise.
James the berzerk
PS-So you only have half a brain too? Glad to know I'm not the only one! ;-)
Quoted text (41 lines)
> OK! I give up! I'm coming out with my keyboard unplugged. > James, the only reason I used driving as a comparison to begin with was > because it was in a newsgroup that had to do with cars. I think that we > can all relate to driving issues. OK SPAM boggs down servers and makes > our lives a living hell having to delete/avoid it at all costs. But at > ALL COSTS? Come on, it was about cars too. It wasn't ***, it wasn't > SPAM in the sense that this guy posts this stuff everyday and and in > triplicate to every newsgroup in existence. I agree that it is wrong, > but give the guy a warning and let him slip up again before sending him > to the gallows. > Now when you get into issues of lives in danger (driving drunk, driving > wrecklessly, getting***d...) that is something totally different. You > can't use these issues for comparison of a SPAM offense or speeding. If > these are all issues of the same category or severity lord help the > fellow that cuts you off in traffic (I'm not refering to you being > berzerk or anything). Otherwise I agree with your point and an glad to > know that puts me in the 1/2-brain catagory. > Sneaks: I have 3 kids and thank god they are still under the age of 4. > I don't want them exposed to same things you don't want your's exposed > to. > Point is - we most often get warnings instead of tickets based on the > severity of the offense. Why not warn the dude before sending him to the > gallows. Give him a chance to NOT do it again. Most reasonable people > take warnings and leave it alone. If it had been *** or something that > was politically, ***ly, or racially offensive then I don't blame > someone for taking the initiative and turning them in. But is was about > cars and saving money. You do have an interest in that don't you? > Yep! Three rights make a left. > Remember that the cops do have cops to make sure that they don't abuse > the power that they were given. > Thanks for your enlighting points of view...all points well taken. > Lon (not the SPAM cop, or the SPAM cop cop, just a concerned watercooled > VW driver)James,
Likewise...
Lon
--
Test Engineering - Embedded Test phone:(972)952-3212
Sensors and Electronic Systems ICBM:33d21'13"N 96d64'75"W
Raytheon Systems Company (formerly Raytheon TI Systems)
Quoted text (72 lines)
> Hey Lon, > To end this peacefully (which I feel never was vicious) I understand what you are > saying. I too don't mind auto related posts, such as a supplier announcing a new > catalog, etc. And I agree with if they posted frequently (being in the watercooled > group you missed my joust with a Sacramento car dealer over that issue) that would be > offensive. And yes, burning *** compared to*** is extreme, but that is only to > make the point (and very unfortunately there are those who think*** is no more of an > offense than burning ***) that we should not judge where others draw the line. > And I have benefitted in that regard. I was once nailed by the California Highway > Patrol doing 80 on a Harley. After admitting I had had one drink, they made me walk > the line, and passing they let me walk from the speed! (I think it was old cop > training a greenhorn and they were seeking a DUI) You can bet your bottom dollar I was > happy that instead of a citation (or worse, I could have been arrested for that severe > of a violation) I got to go home clean! > As to cutting someone off in traffic, just a few weeks ago two people in one car were > ***ed in an act of road rage just a few miles from my house (no, it wasn't berzerk > little ol' me!). With an account like that, I'm damn thankful that we don't physically > see one another on the "Information Superhighway"!!! > Take care bro, I enjoyed the conversation. I hope it was likewise. > James the berzerk > PS-So you only have half a brain too? Glad to know I'm not the only one! ;-) > > OK! I give up! I'm coming out with my keyboard unplugged. > > James, the only reason I used driving as a comparison to begin with was > > because it was in a newsgroup that had to do with cars. I think that we > > can all relate to driving issues. OK SPAM boggs down servers and makes > > our lives a living hell having to delete/avoid it at all costs. But at > > ALL COSTS? Come on, it was about cars too. It wasn't ***, it wasn't > > SPAM in the sense that this guy posts this stuff everyday and and in > > triplicate to every newsgroup in existence. I agree that it is wrong, > > but give the guy a warning and let him slip up again before sending him > > to the gallows. > > Now when you get into issues of lives in danger (driving drunk, driving > > wrecklessly, getting***d...) that is something totally different. You > > can't use these issues for comparison of a SPAM offense or speeding. If > > these are all issues of the same category or severity lord help the > > fellow that cuts you off in traffic (I'm not refering to you being > > berzerk or anything). Otherwise I agree with your point and an glad to > > know that puts me in the 1/2-brain catagory. > > Sneaks: I have 3 kids and thank god they are still under the age of 4. > > I don't want them exposed to same things you don't want your's exposed > > to. > > Point is - we most often get warnings instead of tickets based on the > > severity of the offense. Why not warn the dude before sending him to the > > gallows. Give him a chance to NOT do it again. Most reasonable people > > take warnings and leave it alone. If it had been *** or something that > > was politically, ***ly, or racially offensive then I don't blame > > someone for taking the initiative and turning them in. But is was about > > cars and saving money. You do have an interest in that don't you? > > Yep! Three rights make a left. > > Remember that the cops do have cops to make sure that they don't abuse > > the power that they were given. > > Thanks for your enlighting points of view...all points well taken. > > Lon (not the SPAM cop, or the SPAM cop cop, just a concerned watercooled > > VW driver)Okay, if Lon has 1/2 a brain and James has the other half, where does that
leave me? Wait, i don't wanna know.
Sneaks
BTW, I may have generalized on the spamming too much, but unfortunately spam
to this newsgroup also extends Beyond the NG, hence the references I made. I
believe we can consider this thread dead.
