Spam

[brodie]

ready......................go!

[Craig R. Arko]

Oooops... Never mind.:D

[Phil St. Romain]

I don't like it at all, and I do get my fair share of it.

The best definition I've come across is that it's unwanted communication from another--which would include most telemarketers and a pile of paper mail each day.

The definition of spam as unsolicited communications doesn't work. This would rule out contacting an old friend, or even people in the same business who would probably have an interest in a product. I've replied favorably to both of these types of unsolicited contacts, at times, and was glad I was contacted.

To me, it's the indiscriminate emailing of information which is at the heart of spam. Looking over today's trashed email, I see that a Bob Dallas thinks I might be interested in getting a loan for an auto with him, someone wants to sell me some kind of spy software, teen girls are dying to have me look at them doing naughty things, some Nigerian has sent me a special email to let me in on a good investment deal (yeah, right!!), and (here's the enemy) a company wants to sell me three million email addresses. What all these have in common is there's just nothing about my web site where my email address was surely harvested which suggests that I might be interested in any of those products. I'm just on a list with thousands of others, and the sender is hoping for a 2% return which will more than repay costs.

I turn them all in to spamcop.com, and set up filters to handle the most obvious problems, but inevitably, 10-15 turn up in my In Box each day. Just delete, I know, but that's a lot of wasted bandwidth going around the net, not to mention stuff showing up on our home server that I don't want my teenage son to see. :eek:

All of which is real different from what I heard Brodie describing on that other thread. Spam is a major problem, but software which enables you to send a personalized message to clients, family and friends is OK, as far as I'm concerned. One can use such for good, or for spamming. The software is a morally nuetral entity.

Phil

[Craig R. Arko]

Agreed, as long it's as easy to opt-out (that would mean opt-out code that actually works) as it was to opt-in.

On the other hand, embedded javascript execution (which was also asked for) by a mail client is a sure ticket to assassination by every system/network admin who can. ;)

My real favorite is spammers who spoof being me, which is done by hacking the from and reply-to headers to show whatever they want. Then when the mail bounces because some of the addresses aren't valid, I got the response from the mailer daemon. But the ones that get through see it as having come from my (or your) email addy. We love ethics in advertising.

[macubergeek]

First of all most of the Internet in the US is downstream of WorldCom and by contract bound to enforce an acceptable use policy no more broad than WorldCom's AUP.
This is WorldCom's acceptable Use Policy's "spam" definitions:
System and network security
Violations of system or network security are prohibited, and may result in criminal and civil liability. UUNET will investigate incidents involving such violations and may involve and will cooperate with law enforcement if a criminal violation is suspected. Examples of system or network security violations include, without limitation, the following:

Unauthorized access to or use of data, systems or networks, including any attempt to probe, scan or test the vulnerability of a system or network or to breach security or authentication measures without express authorization of the owner of the system or network.


Unauthorized monitoring of data or traffic on any network or system without express authorization of the owner of the system or network.


Interference with service to any user, host or network including, without limitation, mailbombing, flooding, deliberate attempts to overload a system and broadcast attacks.


Forging of any TCP-IP packet header or any part of the header information in an email or a newsgroup posting.



Email
Sending unsolicited mail messages, including, without limitation, commercial advertising and informational announcements, is explicitly prohibited. A user shall not use another site's mail server to relay mail without the express permission of the site.

If you use an ISP that is downstream of WorldCom you are bound to at least this, but of course consult the AUP of your ISP first.

refer to:
http://www1.worldcom.com/us/legal/usepolicy/

[Phil St. Romain]

mac, unless I'm not understanding things, an unsolicited message is a message that hasn't been solicited or requested, which means that no one could contact anyone else using e-mail if the message hadn't been solicited in the first place. So to really follow this guideline, we'd have to call people first and ask them if it's OK to send them e-mail? But that would be an unsolicited phone call, which would be phone spam. Etc. In other words, I think the term "unsolicited" needs to be better qualified.

Surely there's a common sense dimension to this topic which, if honored, would cut down on a lot of the frustration. It's one thing for me to notify colleagues when I've published a new book, and another to purchase one of those CDs with a million e-mail addresses and send the announcement to all of them. The first case is legitimate business and is often appreciated, but the second would be spamming.

[macubergeek]

The AUP means whatever WorldCom decides it means. Remember that whey you transverse their backbone with your email, you are crossing private property. Your use (or more precisely your ISP's) use of the WorldCom backbone is subject to the AUP as WorldCom deems to enforce it. The key is "Is it massmail, sent to alot of folks at one shot who have not explicitly asked for it"
Emphasis on Mass.
We can split hairs here all we want, but ultimately it's decided by first WorldCom and then the Courts.
Bottom line is don't use email to market your product or service to people you don't know and if you know them, make sure you can prove they gave you permission.
There is much less gray area than you might think.

Right now massmail is clogging the internet. At some ISP's it constitutes as much as 25 percent of the email they move. That means more hard drive space, bigger servers and ultimately greater expense to consumers.

Remember a year ago when you could get free Internet accounts? Well the free ISP's went away...the untold story here was that in addition to the dot com implosion, the spammers virtually took them over and in some cases drove them out of business.
Spammers actively try to HACK mail servers now. Mail server hijackings are a daily event.
So I guess what I am saying is that this is far from just a semantic argument anymore.

If your ISP busts you for spamming, you are pretty much guilty...period...no arguments. If you depend on sending out mass mails for your business, well you better damn well have an air tight contract AND EVEN THEN it can be set aside if it conflicts with an upstream Backbone Provider's AUP.
The real bottom line is market your goods/services through some other means.

[JayBee]

Hi guys. Interesting thread!

I got on to this as a company I'm training up are currently working on an HTML email template for a client (I know, I know...). Basically they want to send out a simple HTML newsletter to opt-in contacts. I'm not happy with the idea, but it is a REDESIGN they're looking for (so they're obviously happy that the model works for them), and anyway it provides a good dummy project for the design lessons :)

ANYWAY, on to the tuppence-worth.

I'm in Scotland, so I'm not sure if we're downstream of WorldCom, but I suspect whoever is up there for us has a similar AUP.

Now, presumably the AUP only REALLY comes into effect when someone complains. Unless a spammer is really clogging things up (on a par with DoS attacks), do WorldCom or whoever really monitor this stuff?

I was always under the impression that AUPs existed for two reasons - first, to allow "fair and free" access to a company's services (be they cell-phones, ISP accounts or whatever), and second, to give the provider something legal to pull out in the event of a complaint : It's much easier to justify an unannounced withdrawal of service if you can say "You violated our AUP" than if you can only say "We don't like you"

My questions are kind of directed in macubergeek's direction, as you seem to have some experience in these matters

First up, how heavily are these things policed? Now, before you say "It only takes one", I know, I know. But if I send out to 60 people on a mailing list for a university society (again, opt-in), am I running a risk of being spotted by my ISP, or does one of the society members have to complain? And their opt-in was written into their membership ("we'll keep you updated of events via email") - technically, if I DON'T email them, I'm in violation of their terms of membership...

Also, what constitutes "Unsolicited"? If Phil were to complain about his long lost buddy contacting him, would WorldCom be able to kick his buddy off. And not only would they be able to, but WOULD THEY? And would they then kick Phil off for sending them the complaint via email, as they didn't ask for it?

I am just curious here, as this really does intrigue me. Okay, we're on private property, but we've paid to be there. We've initiated a contract with our ISP, so is it really accurate to say that their AUP means "whatever they want it to mean"? Surely we have some sort of consumer rights?

And all the threats of legal action don't seem to stop the spammers. Has WorldCom ever taken a company to court for spamming? Or has a company ever taken WorldCom to court for unjustified withdrawal of service?

Just some thoughts, as we seem to be on "it's against the rules" territory here, while all the spammers are round the back of the bike sheds smoking and not getting caught :(

--

"Legally, a crime ain't a crime till you get caught"

[macubergeek]

Like I indicated it's a problem of mass. And like you imply the process is "complaint driven."
When you signed up for your internet service you signed a contract...and like all contracts there is fine print. When your ISP signed up with a backbone provider (WorldCom, Sprint, Digex etc) THEY signed a contract.

The bottom line is if you set up an opt in list then its your responsibility to ensure that if anyone gets your emails that dosn't want them, them they can get rid of them....take the mail lists as an example....the subscriber has to initiate subscription...then the list mails them a confirmation email and the subscriber has to confirm or reply to the list's email....The subscriber gets their email list, the list can prove the subscriber "opted in".

"Consumer Rights" are somewhat irrelevant here. AUP's exist to define what the customer HAS NOT paid for in their monthly internet connection bill.

Let me just say that these matters are actively policed. The problem goes back to the MASS problem as well as the cross border nature of the internet. Are there scoff laws that seem to get away with spamming? Yes. The real problem lately is that spamming is moving upstream from the porn peddlers to main street businesses who don't see that what they are doing is spamming. Again no one thinks their "marketing" is spamming.

The fact is marketing folks use spam because it's cheap. The problem for the rest of us is that it's grown to such proportions that it's crowding out all other traffic.
How would you like to turn on the tap water and find slips of paper urging you to sign up for a free dose of viagra? Ridiculous you say? I mean that would never happen right?

Spammers have been the target of legal action. The problem is it is growing far too easy to get away with it. Legislatures seem unwilling to pass laws criminalizing main street businesses who use spam...

Additionally, the beneficiaries of spam are often not the ones sending the spam. Most of the big spammers are professionals who are driven to more and more ruthless actions to stay in business.

Again don't split hairs over the term "unsolicited". Just because abuse departments get a complaint it dosn't always follow they punish someone. Again not all complaints are interpreted as a violation of AUP.

[JayBee]

Cheers macubergeek - a well structured and concise response to my rambling and sprawling question :)

And I'm not splitting hairs over the definition of "Unsolicited" - that's my lawyer's job :D

/*edit - man, I need to learn how to spell...*/

[brodie]

join here (http://forums.macosxhints.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=10669)

[lerkfish]

brodie: were you trying to link self-reflexively to this thread, or was that an accident?

if intentional, I'm afraid you've lost me...what is your point, again?

[kreesurgeon]

The internet is a place where you can do anything you want. The moment people start imposing rules on what you can and can't do, it starts to become more like the countries we live in. Please let there be one place on earth where freedom still means FREEDOM!

[Craig R. Arko]

Yes, I'd like the freedom to cause the servers of spam senders to spontaneously combust. :cool:

I don't think I'm going to get that freedom, however. We may just have to settle for rule of law instead.


Lerk; I think brodie's link was an unsolicited offer to join this thread. Now he's wondering if we are going to boot him, the link, the thread, or cause the forum server to spontaneously combust. :D

[kreesurgeon]

you do have the freedom to move junk mail to a junk mail folder. (this automatic feature is built in to all but crap email clients) you also have the freedom to not dish out your email address to all@internet.com. Freedom has given me the choice of bouncing to sender which is a great way of not receiving any more from that particluar source. If everyone bounced unsolicited emails to thier source, it may irritate the sender just enough to stop sending them.

P.S. I'm sure you will make a great dictator.

[Craig R. Arko]

Originally posted by kreesurgeon
Freedom has given me the choice of bouncing to sender which is a great way of not receiving any more from that particluar source. If everyone bounced unsolicited emails to thier source, it may irritate the sender just enough to stop sending them.

Or, since the sending address is usually bogus, the vast number of 'account unknown' auto-responses from the mail servers may cause them to spontaeously combust. How about if we just forward them all to you, instead? Spoofing your address as the sender in the headers, like many spammers do? Then you can bounce them back to your own mail server, as freely as you like.

[Phil St. Romain]

I recently received a spam with MY email address as the return, and the topic was about growing a longer penis--an endeavor I'm not especially excited about being associated with. :eek:

Anyone say what they want about freedom and what not, but that just ain't right!

[kreesurgeon]

why don't you spontaeously combust?

[kreesurgeon]

No, but seriously Originally posted by Phil St. Romain
I recently received a spam with MY email address as the return, and the topic was about growing a longer penis--an endeavor I'm not especially excited about being associated with. :eek:

Anyone say what they want about freedom and what not, but that just ain't right!

I received the same email, but it went strait in to my junk folder, I then deleted it with all the other junk.
My point is, if I wanted a longer penis I would have apreciated this email. I don't want to know about war but should I stop people trying to raise awarness of the issue by sending bulk emails. If your going to silence some, why not silence all. right?

[Craig R. Arko]

Originally posted by kreesurgeon
why don't you spontaeously combust?

Have a nice day, kreesurgeon. ;)

[kreesurgeon]

Originally posted by Craig R. Arko
Have a nice day, kreesurgeon. ;)

I surely will, Craig R. Arko. Keep up the good work!

[Phil St. Romain]

If your going to silence some, why not silence all. right?

Nah, sorry, I don't buy that. People who send emails under my email address are doing something unethical. That's just plain wrong.

There are lots of other objections I could raise to your point as I do think there are times when it's appropriate for a society or community to set boundaries on free speech. E.g., there are a few for this discussion board--all in the interest of preserving civil discussions and reducing the noise-to-substance ratio. :)

[kreesurgeon]

I don't go to a Soccer match if I don't want to see a fight, I don't go to Mc Donalds if I don't want someone to say "do you want fries with that", I don't watch the news if I don't want to see death and destruction.
These are thing that go with the territory. If you don't want unsolicited email, don't have an email address.
this is not about freedom of speech, It's about freedom not to listen.:eek:

[Phil St. Romain]

Yas, masstah! ;)

Only . . . you have no problem with people sending emails out under someone else's name? That was my main objection.

[macubergeek]

I'm having a real hard time understanding the point you all are trying to make.

Ok here are a few points of my own:D
1. The internet is not a public utility. It is private property, owned by various backbone providers, ISP's and others, across whos networks internet traffic travels.
2. When you use the internet, you are subject to contractual obligations to observe and obey standards of behaviour consistant with the "Acceptable Use Policy" of your ISP.

So all this talk about sending email out spoofing source addresses...blah....blah....blah

[tcrider]

A tasty canned meat !!!!! Able to stay fresh for many years !!!!!:) :) :)

[kreesurgeon]

I don't give a rats ass about spam, I just fancied an argument!:D

[Craig R. Arko]

Originally posted by kreesurgeon
I don't give a rats ass about spam, I just fancied an argument!:D

Kreesurgeon: I would suggest you re-read the terms of service (http://forums.macosxhints.com/misc.php?s=&action=faq&page=1#rulesroad) you agreed to when registering here. The second and the last bulleted items are particularly relevant.

Thank you. Have yet another nice day.

[kreesurgeon]

Originally posted by Craig R. Arko
Kreesurgeon: I would suggest you re-read the terms of service (http://forums.macosxhints.com/misc.php?s=&action=faq&page=1#rulesroad) you agreed to when registering here. The second and the last bulleted items are particularly relevant.

I do apologize, (and not just for the sake of it). I just got carried away with the debate, although I realize this is no excuse.
Not reading the terms of service on sites when registering, always gets me in trouble.
I assure you that this will not happen again, and I apologize for any Ill feeling I may have caused.
:(

[mervTormel]

... interrupting the barmy flow, does anyone else think his comments on the scene are positively Martian?

argument implies reasonable, rational discourse. from kreesurgeon, we get jibberish, and not even M.python-esque jibberish, which would, at least, be entertaining.

[edit: postscript]

apology snuck in as i was posting. accepted. just after i signed you up for every spam factory in the known universe :D

[Craig R. Arko]

Apology accepted. ;) Welcome to the forum.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go empty out my second batch of junk mail this morning...

[bassi]

During the Korean War, US psy-operations officers came up with a neat idea to bombard their enemy with leaflets. The message was simple enough:

Your communist masters do not care for you, you are cold and hungry. You fight for people who let your families die by starvation. Please surrender your arms, come over to us, and we will take care of you. You will soon join your family on the side of victory.

Hundreds of Korean regulars read these messages on the front line, they started to leave their posts (officers too). A US Army captain relayed this to his commanders, he was immediately ordered to bombard them as they crossed the front line. They were all slaughtered. The Lt.Col. in charge of the psy-ops campaign remarked that it was the most effective use of psychological warfare to date. Now that's effective use of Spam. Delivery, Lie, Click Here. 25% Junk in my mailbox each day. Doesn't compare to artillery bombardment though.

What's interesting is the idea that bandwidth hogs who use P2P are being targeted by some ISP's. The Canadian system of caps on the bandwidth is heralded by the RIAA etc. as a good thing. Yet if you add up the bandwidth taken by Spam deliveries to your mailbox, multiply several million fold EVERY DAY, then why can't lawmakers harp on about this use of bandwidth. Is it insignificant?
I use SpamCop via spamcopsend (http://burtcom.com/lex/) and enjoy it when I see "Yum, this Spam is Fresh", there's something quite gratifying clicking "Send Report Now", even though you know that the report is heeded only some of the time.

[macubergeek]

ok now I'm totally lost...mervtormel I think we have another martian here.....I mean what does psyops in the Korean War have to do with spam?

I guess maybe your saying that if we get enough spam we'll get barraged with artillery?????:confused:

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

Ok lets all try to stay on the page here....
People selling products/services hire spammers to get other people to buy their products/services USING EMAIL

setenv soapbox=false

[mervTormel]

hmm, i thought bassi's post was illuminating. hopefully, spammers won't ever get the idea...

"Reply to this spam, and join our side! become a spam relay and we promise to remove your email address from every spam database in existence!"

[bassi]

macubergeek,

I wasn't trying to get too "soapboxy", I just read an interesting book on psychological warfare and it struck me how easy it is to convince people to "shoot themselves in the foot".
To clarify my point, although I may be stating the obvious here, I was just trying to point out that Spam is an evolution of an age old technique of disinformation, or for want of a better phrase a con trick. If you tell lies big enough some suckers will click that link and take the bait.
Granted, the example I gave is a little extreme but I think I made that clear. Yes, some companies or individuals want to sell me their new penis enlargement kit, or offer free money from Nigeria because I'm the long lost relative of a Texas oilman. They wouldn't bother with these man hours if someone didn't follow through.
On the other side, I get a real hoot out of what some of them send, you could say they provide a snapshot of working principles in internet manipulation. A evolving blueprint to compare and contrast to a rigorous historical record......oh my I just stood on a box again.

The colour of sky here is blue during the day and very dark at night, with scattered showers during the best of times. I think it's Earth.

[macubergeek]

bassi
I used to work in intenet abuse investigation....at an unnamed isp;-)
I've read more spam than most humans on the planet.

There is nothing like disinformation going on. Spammers are using email to peddle the latest porn site, penis enlargement drug, or diploma mill to the masses. Its straight commerce. Porn sites used to be the major employers of spammers. Lately spam has moved upstream to so called legitimate businesses like mortgage loan companies and even real estate agents.
The closest thing to a con may be those peddling viagra and penis enhancements lately but its still low rent marketiing...they aren't trying to influence your mind in any deep way.
If you respond to spammers they will use that to CONFIRM that your email address is correct and you'll never be rid of them.
Frankly the only defense is the excellant spam filter in Mail.app!!!
I've not seen any other email filtering device that works as well and believe me I've tried them all.
So it's not as high planed as psychological warfare or anything like that....frankly most of the spammers I've talked to would laugh at that idea.

The main problem here is it is costing everybody. ISP's pass the additional costs of handling this crap onto everybody....It means bigger pipes, bigger harddrives on mail servers etc etc.
Its a money thing...nothing more high blown than dat.

[bassi]

Readin' all that spam, you must have had some favourites.

Anyway, to go even further into the abyss, it's not surprising that marketing has developed new strategies to sell their goods. The new methodology of SMS spam messages to mobile phones has really taken off in some parts of Europe. I suppose "good business is where you find it".

What's different about most Spam email is there is no real demographic, except for the fact that you have access to a computer and email. Which can be pretty broad and ineffective. That's changing. Some internet spiders are clever enough to garner info from what they believe to be "ripe targets".
Regarding disinformation, I do believe that "the large print giveth, and the small print taketh away".
As far as il/legitimate spammers laughing at the idea of Spam being analogous to psy-warfare. Well, it was advertising executives who told the CIA to produce comic strips in their propaganda, to more effectively relay their message. Advertising/Spam is under this category, it usually tries to tap into a fear of some kind and/or fulfill a need, unsollicited of course. Warfare is a harsh word because it classifies the consumer as an enemy, but they use terms such as "target audience", "hit ratings" and "advertising bombardment".

Once you read something, however trite or irrelevant, it's in the mind, like a catchy advert jingle on the radio (a la Demolition Man), or an embarassing rumour about a politician etc. etc. Advertising, ergo Spam has to use these psychological techniques, the added advantage is the intimacy they have with the user.

Finally, I do agree it's all about the money, what isn't these days? ;)

[macubergeek]

sexual inadequacy, greed, money, fear of death...all great marketing hooks.
hell I even get telephone marketers leaving messages on my telephone answering machine.

The true question is:
Are you mad enough to end it.

Write your congressman, senator, tell them you want harsh penalties for spammers. Give ISP's the tools to end it. You can't expect ISP's to spend their resources on a never ending treadmill if the electorate only wants to whine and complain.

[mervTormel]

hmm, it seems to me that education is a partial solution here. if everyone knew how to identify spam, and that the only valid thing to do with it is delete it, spammers would stop for it would constitute a losing business proposition.

[bassi]

I can't want it to end, how did I leave that impression? How do you stop it from raining when the clouds are full? This sort of phenomena seems too big, bigger than any government, even the US. Unless they want to enforce international spam laws with the Seventh Fleet.
Actually, here in Europe they tried to get rid of it, but since 90% of the spam originates outside of Europe and those ISP's will be unlikely to do anything about it, there'll be no difference.
As for the whining and complaining electorate, if we all develop an "internet self-defense" then we will save the ISP overhead and server load. Also, being a card carrying member who abstains on most votes, I only wish to clarify and interject.
Everything else would only serve the dissonance.

[mervTormel]

some spam are so finely targeted, they are incomprehensible to the everyman...

Status: U
Return-Path: <www15@xnode21.serverdienst.de>
Received: from xnode21.serverdienst.de ([212.168.31.2])
by pickering.mail.mindspring.net (Earthlink Mail Service) with ESMTP id 188olh7GJ3Nl3p20
for <me@myisp.com>; Sun, 3 Nov 2002 12:15:18 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from www15@localhost)
by xnode21.serverdienst.de (8.11.6/8.11.6) id gA3HB7f25400;
Sun, 3 Nov 2002 18:11:07 +0100
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 18:11:07 +0100
Message-Id: <200211x31711.gA3HBxf25400@xnode21.serverdienst.de>
To: <abuttloadofusers>
From: mybaby@email.com ()
Subject: lon


Hello,
If you are a Time Traveler I am going to need the following:

1. A modified mind warping Dimensional Warp Generator # 52 4350a series wrist watch with memory adapter.

2. Reliable carbon based, or silicon based time transducing capacitor.

I need a reliable source!! Please only reply if you are reliable. Send a (SEPARATE) email to me at:Tomnwrr@aol.com

bdtrekerbdtgrPQfyeoLMuM

(mybaby@email.com) on Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 18:11:07
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

XZOGNWUocU28815: NQdipxMFgleL Bc

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[bassi]

Holy Cow!!

Just the other day I was saying to a friend, "you know, we should sell our spare carbon and silicon based time transducing capacitors, so we could buy new Powerbooks next week".

:D

[mervTormel]

yeah, but are they reliable?!

--
now where did i put my plutonium 238 space modulator?

[bassi]

:D

[mervTormel]

good article:

http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/2002/11/01/spam.html

[griffeymac]

I hate spam just as much as everyone else, but I don't get much, if any, on my "legitimate" email addresses (work and home).

That's because I don't sign up for anything using either of those addresses. I don't give those addresses when I purchase anything online. I use my Yahoo! address instead (which gets TONS of spam, of course--much of it from Yahoo! themselves...). In fact, I'll give a fake address (usually I pick goofy@disney.com) if I'm not expecting to need a temporary password (or whatever) mailed to me.

Spam is sort of a fact of life, I guess.

Now if I could get my brother- and sister-in-law to quit using my mother-in-law's home email address to sign up at skateboarder sites, my life would be much, much easier. :)

G.--

[nkuvu]

Originally posted by griffeymac
In fact, I'll give a fake address (usually I pick goofy@disney.com) if I'm not expecting to need a temporary password (or whatever) mailed to me.

My favorite trick is to write an email address for abuse at their domain. So for example, if I am visiting foobar.com and they want an email address, I enter 'abuse@foobar.com'.

If I need a password mailed to me once, I'll use my Hotmail account. If I expect some continued correspondence, I use my Yahoo account. Only close friends or trusted sites get my primary address.

[griffeymac]

Ahhh.... I like your tactic much better than my Disney one. ;)

Thanks!

G.--

[macubergeek]

This is an "old school" internet trick

give them the email address root@example.com

its used in cisco text books and believe it or not it's actually registered and valid email address!

[nkuvu]

You have reached this web page by typing "example.com", "example.net", or "example.org" into your web browser.

These domain names are reserved for use in documentation and are not available for registration.
Heh. They're right -- I entered example.com into my web browser...

[Andrew LaGow]

...And to think all this time I've been wasting my time using billg@microsoft.com

[spartakus]

Hello guys.. I have been reading the original thread and this one that brodie moved. I have a small business and we have a advantage program similar to golf galaxy. I have been on a windows machine and have been using high impact pro to send my emails. I have since switched to a mac and I need a program that has many templetes or some how make my own like golf galaxy or apple does when they send you product update. NOTE: this is not spam the customers come into my store to sign up. They are the only ones that get the email. I have looked at email commander and direct mail but no templates to make it look good.
Any ideas thanks
Spartakus

[yellow]

Any ideas thanks
Spartakus

Please note that this thead is over 4 years old. It's not terribly relevant anymore.

[Anti]

I think Spartakus set a thread-bump record.