The war on spam is... lost. - news.admin.net-abuse.email

Message from discussion The war on spam is... lost.

SuN Tsu

View profile

More options May 22 2005, 4:16 pm

Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email

From: "SuN Tsu" <bananana...@spamblocked.com>

Date: 22 May 2005 13:16:25 -0700

Local: Sun, May 22 2005 4:16 pm

Subject: Re: The war on spam is... lost.

  Reply to author
  |
  Forward
  | Print
  | View thread
  | Show original
  | Report this message
  | Find messages by this author
  

Note: The author of this message, Russell Miller, realising that he is
about to post yet another "brain f@rt" and wishing to keep said brain
f@rt quiet, requested that it not be archived. This message will be
removed from Groups in 6 days (May 29).

Russell Miller wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

> On 2005-05-22, David Cary Hart <ExMach...@TQMcube.com> wrote:

> > That said, I suspect that a great deal of UCE is pointlessly
> > generated by get rich quick nee'r do wells who are scammed into
> > purchasing lists, software, BP hosting, etc. I have no sympathy
> > for these people but an effective demand-side campaign would
> > create a deterrent and selling spam support would no longer be
> > economically viable.

> Some have already demonstrated on this group (using information
> I haven't verified but it seems right) that it only takes a few
> purchases to make a spam run profitable. It's not possible to
> reach every single potential purchaser of spam (at least without
> the use of spam ourselves), much less to convince them not to do
> it. Like it or not, spammers offer what (some) people want.
> Maybe not the vast majority of people, but enough to keep them
> in KFC...

Only a novice NANAE poster would assume that all spammers are poor.
You should know better after the hundreds of articles you have authored
in NANAE and alt.usenet.kooks

> The primary purpose of most blocklists is to keep spam from
> reaching the mailboxes of the users. Even SPEWS and Spamhaus
> have that as a primary purpose, although they also put pressure
> on the providers. Even at that, SPEWS provides a great amount
> of proof that many spammy providers won't even listen to that
> pressure (the occasional success story, while welcome, doesn't
> appear to be the rule - and that goes for spamhaus too).

> Spam is only bulk when it comes to sending.

According to whom outside of KTBF?

> When it comes to receiving, it only takes
> one or two suckers to make it worthwhile.

Are you sure about that? Can you provide any attribution / facts /
figures / proof other then the word a fellow member of KTBF?

That was spoken like someone who doesn't know the first thing about
spam and spam fighting.

Wait, you don't.

> That makes it very,very difficult to address on the demand side. I'm

not arguing that spam is not wrong.

> I'm only arguing

Some things *never* change, unfortunately. :(

> that the war as it is framed now is unwinnable.

You Shirley don't sound much like an anti-spammer with that attitude.

Wait, that's because you *aren't* an anti-spammer. You spend / waste
an inordinate amount of time obsessively stalking and trolling
(starting with Jamie / Moris / FSS / Barbara) and you have NEVER
researched and posted about spam and/or spammers.

Why is that, Miller?

And yes, you are correct. Any army consisting solely of
_anti-spammers_ such as yourself, would be fighting an "unwinnable"
battle.

You aren't very smart, but you Shirley are very funny. ;-)

> --Russell (still using NANAE as my very own personal blog:-)

Miller, although you believe yourself to be the center of universe, it
is an extremely minority position.

How can anyone, who consistently demonstrates total disrespect on such
a grand scale for those whom you do not like, expect to be respected
yourself?

"What goes around, comes around."

Cheers,

SuN

--
"I'm going to take my own advice. Trollfeeders will now be
killfiled. I don't care who you are or how "respected"
you are (or think you are). I don't care if you're the
fucking pope himself, you feed a troll, you get plonked."

"Honestly, I don't care if I offended catholics, I don't
consider it to be a religion worthy of respect.

-Russell Miller, carelessly pissing off an entire major religion with
two insensitive statements simply because he doesn't like them. :(

Reply to author Forward