HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gallaghe@vax.sonoma.edu (Mycal)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Job paperwork stuff
Keywords: invasion, privacy, ssn
Date: 19 Dec 92 08:04:00 GMT
Organization: Sonoma State University
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


Hi,

Today was a bad day.  Our company was aquired by a much bigger company.
So today we got a visit from there personel department.  The stuff that
the personel droids wanted was outragious.  They wanted every line, every
space, every bubble filled out on every form they had.  Also they wanted
a copy of our ssn card, a copy of our birth certificate, and our first
born (just kidding there.)

They said that they needed the ssn card copy and birth certificate for
there records back east so they could show the government that we were
good american citizens.  They wanted the ssn number of our children and
spouse.  They even had a place to put our race in,  they said that we didn't
have to fill this out since they would get it off the birth certificate or
the administrator would fill it out.

Needless to say a few of us couldn't beleve this and after fighting with
the personell droid and a number of calles back east, about two hours later,
(this lady musta thought I was a real asshole) they decided they didn't need
the birth certificate copy, nor the copy of the ssn card.  Well luckly
since there was so much confusion be cause of all this, we didn't get 
the paper all filled out, and we are supposto send them monday, and the
droid went home tonight.  So we are going to be unsupervised on filling
these papers out :)

Race :  Human (somewhat)

Also I have this neet leter that I am going to send there personell dept,
that states that they are only to use my ssn for tax related purposes, and
not to give it to health insurers and the like.  I threw in the bit about
the US law about privacy and ssn and denial of service just for good mesure.
(which I have the relivant text at home, I guess I should post it, later)
But they won't get anyone elses in my families ssn number, no way.
(they get mine on the W-4)

Any way just though I would let you know what is up in the my corner of 
the world in reguards to privacy, and what I am doing to fight for it.

'tell next time

mycal
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
From: O1EVERT@VM1.CC.UAKRON.EDU (Tom Evert)
Subject: Re: Junk mailers dirty tricks
Organization: The University of Akron
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 02:16:02 GMT

In article <Dec.18.14.50.23.1992.27164@romulus.rutgers.edu>
vanembur@romulus.rutgers.edu (Bill Van Emburg) writes:
 
>Also, as I think others have already mentioned here, the Post Office
>*does* make your change of address card available to others.  In fact,
>they sell mass lists of change of address cards, on the rationale that
>they want to reduce the amount of incorrect mail they handle.  So, the
>Post Office is in the mailing list business as much as anybody (or more!).
 
Wouldn't supprise me if the PO scans other than zip codes on their newer
sorting machines and sell even more names!
 
I'm reading a book called "Privacy for Sale".  Jeffery Rothfeder makes
some strong statements about how TRW, Equifax and many other credit
bureaus sell names, etc. to telemarketers and junk mail places and keep
these companies electronic profiles of all of us up-to-date.
 
Xref: sparky alt.privacy:2616 misc.consumers:20606
From: jsp@uts.amdahl.com (James Preston)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
Subject: Re: Junk mailers dirty tricks
Date: 14 Dec 92 17:58:09 GMT
Reply-To: jsp@pls.amdahl.com
Distribution: na
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA


lachman@netcom.com (Hans Lachman) writes:

}What would be ideal is if there were a scheme by which 100% of the mail
}I receive is identifiable in terms of how the sender got my address.
}The "suite number" method failed.  I thought of giving out variations
}on my name, but in most of my dealings, I need to give my real name
}(e.g., to employers, credit card issuers, other financial accounts).
}Does anyone out there have a clever method (that WORKS)?  If so, please
}send your reply to me directly.

Most other people I've heard of who have tried this have used a different
letter for their middle initial.  Given that your employer and those
holding your financial accounts aren't in the habit of selling mailing
lists, I don't see why you would want to use your P.O. Box for them
anyway, so the middle initial shouldn't be a problem.

--James Preston

Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Junk mailers dirty tricks
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 01:52:55 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <78Fi03LGc3jI00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> jsp@uts.amdahl.com (James Preston) writes:


>lachman@netcom.com (Hans Lachman) writes:

>}What would be ideal is if there were a scheme by which 100% of the mail
>}I receive is identifiable in terms of how the sender got my address.
>}The "suite number" method failed.  I thought of giving out variations
>}on my name, but in most of my dealings, I need to give my real name
>}(e.g., to employers, credit card issuers, other financial accounts).
>}Does anyone out there have a clever method (that WORKS)?  If so, please
>}send your reply to me directly.

>Most other people I've heard of who have tried this have used a different
>letter for their middle initial.  

>Given that your employer and those
>holding your financial accounts aren't in the habit of selling mailing
>lists, ...

Maybe _your_ employer and _your_ banks and credit card companies
don't, but if so you are in the minority.  I have received many 
a mailing at my credit-card billing address that could only have
come from the credit card company.

American Express, to its credit, will honor your request if you ask
them not to sell your name.  Most other credit card companies
either have no such pro-privacy policy or do not publicize it.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax 212-765-2519
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: Miracle at Radio Shack
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 13 Dec 92 14:11:37 EST (Sun)
From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine)

>Then the salesdroid said that the return inventory mail
>list is separate from the junk mail list. So I foolishly relented,
>being in something of a hurry.

Do what I used to do.  Lie.  I hear that Rat Shack employees get into
big trouble if they're caught entering made up addresses, which
doesn't bother me a bit if they persist in demanding an address after
I say no.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl
Xref: sparky alt.privacy:2620 misc.consumers:20619
From: adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
Subject: Re: Junk mailers dirty tricks
Date: 14 Dec 92 21:15:04 GMT
Article-I.D.: das.1992Dec14.211504.1284
Distribution: na
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University

In article <Bz997q.F52@Novell.COM> norsk@mobius (Doug Thompson) writes:

>Sometimes, if I take the time to examine the junk-stuff, I check to see
>if they have a postage paid return envelope. If so, I either stuff as
>much stuff in it and mail it, or attach it to a very large envelope fill
>with waste paper and mail it. Obviously, I don't put my return address
>on it, so I don't know if it works (no feed back). I've always wanted
>to know if I could mail it with a 'brick', might try it some day

Ever since the Yippies started doing this in the 60's, Post Offices
have been throwing out bricks, etc, taped to Postage reply cards.  If
you want to take advantage of this trick, get a large buisness reply
envelope, and fill it with newspapers or something.  Anything larger
will probably be discarded.

Adam


Adam Shostack 					adam@das.harvard.edu

What a terrible thing to have lost one's .sig.  Or not to have a .sig
at all because of elections.  How true that is.
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
From: dbushong@wang.com (Dave Bushong)
Subject: Re: Junk mailers dirty tricks
Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 19:06:49 GMT

lachman@netcom.com (Hans Lachman) writes:


>As a self-proclaimed soldier in the war against information abuse,
>I decided to try to see how junk mailers get my address.  What I did
>was I got a box at one of those "Mailbox USA"-type places, and then
>gave everyone a slightly different variation on the address.
>(The address assigned to me was of the form "100 Main St. Suite 123",
>so I would add a letter, e.g., "Suite 123-J" -- the staff there said
>it would be OK.)

>What I found was that most junk mailers got my address via magazines
>that I subscribe to, e.g., Data Communications and Business Week.
>However, the most annoying types of junk mail (e.g., "YOU MAY HAVE WON
>A PRIZE - CALL 1-900-976-JUNK") did not have any suite number on the
>address at all.  My guess is that they are using a database that strips
>the address down to the minimum needed for delivery.  So much for my
>experiment.

>What would be ideal is if there were a scheme by which 100% of the mail
>I receive is identifiable in terms of how the sender got my address.
>The "suite number" method failed.  I thought of giving out variations
>on my name, but in most of my dealings, I need to give my real name
>(e.g., to employers, credit card issuers, other financial accounts).
>Does anyone out there have a clever method (that WORKS)?  If so, please
>send your reply to me directly.

I'd be glad to, but you need to post your address here.  

Just kidding.

But seriously, I tried the same experiment, with similar (disappointing)
results.  The other weird thing is that my son (who hasn't lived at home for
4 years now) is still getting college-type mail (study help, loan offers,
etc.), and I've moved about four times since he lived with me.

I think that's the "address correction requested" thing that does that
for the pests.

Dave
-- 
Dave Bushong, Wang Laboratories, Inc.   Amateur Radio Callsign KZ1O
Project Leader, OCR products            kz1o@n0ary.#noca.ca.na
Internet: dbushong@wang.com
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Junk mailers dirty tricks
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 04:01:20 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <Bz7p3E.FE8@wang.com> dbushong@wang.com (Dave Bushong) writes:

>But seriously, I tried the same experiment, with similar (disappointing)
>results.  The other weird thing is that my son (who hasn't lived at home for
>4 years now) is still getting college-type mail (study help, loan offers,
>etc.), and I've moved about four times since he lived with me.

>I think that's the "address correction requested" thing that does that
>for the pests.

Yes.  The way you slipped up was by revealing your actual new address to
the Postal Service when you moved.  Smart thing to do is have your mail
forwarded to a post office box in the new location.  The junk mailers will
learn the po box number by address correction requested, or simply by
buying the list of movers from the postal service.

But later you just close the po box, having revealed your actual new
address only to those of your choosing.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax 212-765-2519
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Miracle at Radio Shack
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 15:28:52 EST
From: John R. Levine <johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us>

I bought a $4 cable at my local Radio Shack yesterday and when I paid for it,
they didn't ask for my name.  Will miracles never cease!  The sales slip
didn't have someone else's name on it either.

I imagine that since my local Rat Shack is in Harvard Square and is patronized
mostly by highly opinionated students, they got tired of fighting with all
of their customers about names.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
From: bear@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Bear Giles)
Subject: Re: Junk mailers dirty tricks
Organization: National Oceanic & Atmospheric Adminstration / Boulder Labs
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 22:32:16 GMT

In article <adams.724618269@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) writes:
>>But later you just close the po box, having revealed your actual new
>>address only to those of your choosing.
>
>Not quite.  Anyone who wants to, can get the boxholder's street address
>from the Postmaster.

That's true with a Post Office PO box, but not true of commercial PO boxes.

A friend of mine who publishes a magazine for a nontraditional religion
made _very_ sure of that before renting a box at a local commerical PO box
site.  It seems he gets enough death threats (from good Christians who
would rather kill him than see him go to Hell) that he can't risk the
Post Office telling anyone where he lives.

BTW, he also mails his magazine first-class.  It seems that the Post Office
only grants magazine rates to companies willing to reveal their mailing
lists on demand; once again, since death threats are fairly common to
him and his contributors he refuses to run the risk of that list falling
into the wrong hands.

-- 
Bear Giles
bear@fsl.noaa.gov/cs.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: alien@boi.hp.com (Tom von Alten)
Subject: Re: not so anonymous cash
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 19:32:09 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard / Boise, Idaho
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.7 PL6]

Andrew Baker Glazier (glazier@isr.harvard.edu) wrote:

: >1. Radio Shack which has always tracked its customer's names, but as
: >far as I can tell has used this only to mail me their catalog.
: "as far as I can tell" being the important bit of that sentence. To their
: credit, they do not press the issue if you refuse such information. (at
: least the one I go to doesn't)

I don't shop there very often, but at my last visit, they asked for my name
while I had cash in my hand.  I said, "I just want to give you money for
this part here," and the cashier understood me well enough.

"Just say no."

If they're stupid enough to complain, walk.
_____________
Tom von Alten
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
From: richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Junk mailers dirty tricks
Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail.  Playa del Rey, CA
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 15:55:01 GMT

For those who live in a private house or townhouse/garden apartment
(anyplace which has a unique street number) you can do as I did.
When I moved into my house, I gave everybody (magazines, DMV, etc)
the address with a different apartment number.  Then when I wonder
where a particular piece of junk mail got my address,  I just
look up the apartment number on my list.  The three biggest contributors
are my drivers license, the Serria Club, and the local tax collector.

The tax collector is a unique case.  I live on 75th street, but they
have my address as 075th street,  as does a lot of my junk mail.
(Couldn't give them a phony apt number, but their own computer which
uses zero fill rather than blank bill does just as well.  I wonder
how they accomodate the 5 digit street numbers in some areas of the
county.)

I used to send stuff back, now it just goes into the paper recycling
bin without being opened.
-- 
Rich Greenberg      Work: rmg50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: richg@hatch.socal.com       310-649-0238
What?   Me speak for Amdahl?  Surely you jest....
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: gardner@convex.com (Steve Gardner)
Subject: Re: drug dealers on the h
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 21:15:32 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In article <Dec.18.10.37.54.1992.25185@romulus.rutgers.edu> vanembur@romulus.rutgers.edu (Bill Van Emburg) writes:
>Perhaps this tea *does* contain trace amounts of
>cocaine or the substances from which cocaine is derived. 
	More than trace amounts.  It is used by travelers to overcome
	the effects of altitude and it will make you flunk a piss
	test.


>But really,can you equate this with snorting some fine white powder?
	I don't but why can't I buy mate de coca here?  Ask the DEA.



>Do you really think the effect is anywhere near as strong??
	No.  But like I said it points out the absurdity of the
	hypocritical and stupid war on some drugs being conducted by
	our government.  Its a war on reason and balance and the more
	opportunities we have to show this the better.  Your observations
	only make my case stronger.


						smg

Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: bear@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Bear Giles)
Subject: Re: Monitoring
Organization: National Oceanic & Atmospheric Adminstration / Boulder Labs
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 00:35:40 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.145506.4442@burrhus.harvard.edu> glazier@isr.harvard.edu (Andrew Baker Glazier) writes:
>So do the police in my town, on the normal and emergency
>phone lines. And they refuse any request not to have the call you're making
>monitored

Calling the police can quickly become a matter of public record.  They
may need to introduce your phone call as evidence in a criminal case;
there is no comparison between this and a call to a business.

-- 
Bear Giles
bear@fsl.noaa.gov/cs.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
From: brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton)
Subject: Re: Junk mailers dirty tricks
Organization: ClariNet Communications Corp.
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 01:42:31 GMT

One common trick is to use a different middle name or middle initial.
Do this on everything but legal documents.

Of course, the other solution is to put something like "Mail stop 100"
which people are unlikely to delete.
-- 
Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Sunnyvale, CA 408/296-0366
From: glazier@isr.harvard.edu (Andrew Baker Glazier)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: Monitoring
Date: 14 Dec 92 14:55:06 GMT
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

>In article <1992Dec14.005102.7608@rose.com> robert.heuman@rose.com (robert heuman) writes:
>>
>>Date Entered: 12-13-92 19:40
>>Keystroke monitoring is simply one manifestation of a problem.  I have 
>>great difficulty with making telephone calls to various US Software 
>>houses and their support lines where I am told that the call will be 
>>monitored to ensure that I receive quality support... after I listen 
>>to the musak...
>>
>Borland did this to me just last week.  It was "to assure quality."
>
 Sallie Mae does it too, although they will stop it (or at least claim they
will) if you ask. So do the police in my town, on the normal and emergency
phone lines. And they refuse any request not to have the call you're making
monitored

-- 
"A horse! A horse! Somebody give me a horse, man, because|glazier@ 
I come to bury this dirtball, not to praise him. Whaddya |harvard.isr.edu
think I am? Whether it's nobler for the mind to make people suffer with all
these totally outrageous arrows arrows for a fortune, or what!" -- D.R.
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Subject: Re: Junk mailers dirty tricks
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 07:51:14 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
Distribution: na

adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:

>>But later you just close the po box, having revealed your actual new
>>address only to those of your choosing.

>Not quite.  Anyone who wants to, can get the boxholder's street address
>from the Postmaster.

No, not unless the box is being used to sell to the public.  There is 
a box to be checked on the rental form where you indicate whether 
the box is used for commercial purposes.  If that box is not checked,
the PO will not release the info absent some indication of mail fraud.
The PO did not even require me to list a street address on my personal
PO Box.  They did on the company one, of course.

Even if they did, the way around this problem is to simply open the 
box before you move and list your old address on the card.

John
-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
Performance Engineering Magazine(TM) | Interested in high tech and computers? 
Marietta, Ga                         | Send ur snail-mail address to 
jgd@dixie.com                        | perform@dixie.com for a free sample mag
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
From: bear@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Bear Giles)
Subject: Re: Junk mailers dirty tricks
Organization: National Oceanic & Atmospheric Adminstration / Boulder Labs
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 02:23:47 GMT

In article <r0ar63k@dixie.com> jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>bear@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Bear Giles) writes:
>
>>BTW, he also mails his magazine first-class.  It seems that the Post Office
>>only grants magazine rates to companies willing to reveal their mailing
>>lists on demand; once again, since death threats are fairly common to
>>him and his contributors he refuses to run the risk of that list falling
>>into the wrong hands.
>
>Not true at all.  This claim is ludicrous on its face.  A magazine's
>subscriber list is among its most valuable assets and is zealously 
>protected.  You can see the names for typically $220 per 1k names.

He claims that the local postmaster showed him the regs in a big book
of postal regulations.  I have had no reason to doubt him; but I could
ask him for more information when he gets back from vacation.

(At this point I should point out that this was the postmaster of a
high-country Post Office.  Many people move to the high country to
escape bureaucracy and will base their actions on the stated regulations,
not just "common practice."  The Post Office may rarely involve that
clause on 3rd class mail, but it (apparently) exists).

BTW, I would not consider $220 per 1k names "valuable," especially since
his subscriber list is only in the hundreds.  However, he considers that
list valuable in that he will wipe out his hard disk with a large magnet
before revealing the names and addresses.

(Having seen some of his hate mail, I understand and agree fully).

-- 
Bear Giles
bear@fsl.noaa.gov/cs.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Store settles suit on privacy
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 01:35:15 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC


An article in a recent issue of the New York Times describes a lawsuit
in which Mervyn's Department stores in California may be 
eligible for nearly $6 million worth of vouchers.  The store had been
requiring customers to reveal their telephone numbers when using 
charge cards, but state law says customers did not have to. 
Four customers sued, and now the store is settling.

Keep up the good work, I say.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax 212-765-2519
Newsgroups: alt.privacy