[sane-devel] "Tollyboy Products"

[Gene Heskett]

On Wednesday 16 October 2002 12:10, Martyn Ranyard wrote:
>At 11:07 AM 10/16/02 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>I take it you didn't visit the web page to see just what
>> tollyboy's jolly generator was then?  I didn't go past the
>> opening page, but its front and center display was for a
>> combination safety belt and cod-piece from 500 years back,
>> called a 'security' belt.  Complete with gold chains & assorted
>> S&M trimmings.
>>
>>In other words that autoresponder message is nothing more than
>> pure spam, and has absolutely nothing to do with sane.  Pull
>> down filters, add a from=autoresponder, close, hit ctrl+j and
>> voila! uce@ftc.gov now will get all further copies starting with
>> the 3 I've got so far today.
>
>Now hold on just a cotton-picking.  How do you make the bold
> statement that rules out that this person, who, no matter his
> occupation and lack of forethought with his autoresponder, might
> have a scanner and OS that sane runs on.
>
>Your indignant message is based more on what he does as work and
> not what he is doing regards autoresponders.  Do you know the
> occupation of all the sane-devel list subscribers?  I  would say
> remove him temporarily and notify him that if he wants to
> resubscribe to not put any autoresponders on.  Also, my vote is
> to put a few little filters on the mailing list to reject
> autoresponders.

The indignancy content of my message was purely based on the fact 
that the links contained in that message led directly to the image 
I quoted about.  That was what popped up on screen simply by 
clicking on the supplied link.  I frankly haven't got 50 cents to 
call somebody who *might* care about your feelings in this case.  
The plain fact is that he is spamming this list with a message that 
is most certainly not appropriate for this list.  If he didn't want 
me to treat him as a common spammer, the message thats now been 
repeated about 25 times would be both on topic, and certainly on 
this list, carry non-pruient content.  It is neither.

What if your 11 year old daughter had clicked on that link?  I'd 
suspect a different attitude would have prevailed in that case.

>I certainly cannot advocate removing someone from the list
> (blocking as someone else has suggested) based on their
> occupation.  If this person does start submitting spam (other
> than his current non-thinking responder) then yes, by all means,
> but not guilty until proven innocent.

I repeat at risk of boreing everybody, the evidence is in this case 
overwhelming to anyone who took the few seconds to view it.

>>I recommend US citizens follow suite.
>
>Thankfully I am not a US citizen, I am a UK subject, and
> therefore, if I don't bow to the queen, I can have my head
> chopped off.

And I think your queen is a very cool lady.  She has managed to keep 
her regality intact through quite a tempestous decade in merry old 
England.  I have VERY serious doubts that she would have your head 
chopped off.  A private message of displeasure maybe...

-- 
Cheers, Gene
AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M
Athlon1600XP@1400mhz  512M
99.18% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly