Re: mail bomb / spam

2000-08-20 Thread Thomas Mueller
>Anybody got any thoughts on 'retaliation' ? Perhaps there's too much mail as it is, so filling their reply address mailbox with c*ap would be a tad irresponsible? Answers on a postcard > One thing I thought of is responding to the "remove" address but with other than your own email address,

Re: mail bomb / spam

2000-08-18 Thread Dale Mentzer
On 15 Aug 00 at 15:55, Pete wrote: >>In three months online at this location, I have recieved only *one* >>letter that I considered to be spam. IIRC it was posted to the list by >>someone who thought other listers might find it useful ;-) While using >>the Aptiva all last year I found the "spam f

Re: mail bomb / spam

2000-08-18 Thread Dale Mentzer
On 18 Aug 00 at 18:08, Neil Smith wrote: >>Anybody got any thoughts on 'retaliation' ? Perhaps there's too much mail as >>it is, so filling their reply address mailbox with c*ap would be a tad >>irresponsible? Answers on a postcard Well, if it were junk snail mail, I would suggest putting th

Re: mail bomb / spam

2000-08-18 Thread Dale Mentzer
On 19 Aug 00 at 0:43, J. J. Young wrote: >> Sam Heywood and I conducted an amusing correspondence a few months >> ago, with convoluted attempts to avoid direct use of the term >> "mailbomb" (Oops, I did it again). We'll have to come to an agreement >> over disguising troublesome terms. Re

Re: mail bomb / spam

2000-08-18 Thread Clarence Verge
J. J. Young wrote: > >Sam Heywood and I conducted an amusing correspondence a few months >ago, with convoluted attempts to avoid direct use of the term >"mailbomb" (Oops, I did it again). We'll have to come to an agreement >over disguising troublesome terms. Reverse the letter ord

Re: mail bomb / spam

2000-08-18 Thread Pete
On Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:08:45 +0100, Neil Smith wrote: >> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:55:45 >> From: "Dale Mentzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: Spammer service ad > I can confirm receipt of that spam from that bulk email lot. > The fact that it came to Dale as well suggests that either we have

Re: mail bomb / spam

2000-08-18 Thread J. J. Young
Neil Smith wrote: >> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:55:45 >> From: "Dale Mentzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: Spammer service ad > I can confirm receipt of that spam from that bulk email lot. > The fact that it came to Dale as well suggests that either we have both > subscribed to some site on t

mail bomb / spam

2000-08-18 Thread Neil Smith
>Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:55:45 >From: "Dale Mentzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Spammer service ad I can confirm receipt of that spam from that bulk email lot. The fact that it came to Dale as well suggests that either we have both subscribed to some site on the web & they've passed on deta