HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,news.admin.misc
Subject: Re: Question about unsolicited Internet Email.
Keywords: question legal use email
Date: 8 Oct 92 07:28:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: dixie.5-hp_zn
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

casper@fwi.uva.nl (Casper H.S. Dik) writes:

>Whether or not it is illegal to send out junk mail, writing a program
>to collect address from Usenet will only costs a few man-minutes.
>Sending a mass mailing to those people costs only a few man-minutes as well
>(and many computer hours). It's too cheap/easy to allow and of
>questionable legality.

No question regarding the legality in the US.  Leaf countries that
choose to disagree are responsible for doing their own filtering.

>Third, one junk message can easily be deleted, but what if we allow this?

In the immortal words  of Tonto, "What's this 'we' shit, whiteman?"  In 
point of fact, there is nothing "we" or any other entity can do about it
other than bitch and pull the kinds of petty, childish stunts described
by Todd such as mailing the man pages.  Junk email is here to stay
just like paper email is.  The ONLY effective thing you can do about
it is to ignore it so that it becomes an unsuccessful marketing technique.

>How long before we get hundreds of junk mail messages each day? Each
>from a different address/with a different subject. I've better
>things to do than collect the few interresting ones from the
>hundreds of unwanted messages. 

Emminent death of the Internet is at hand.  *sigh*  Hundreds?  Really?
What an imagination.

>The fourth reason is the fact that many people pay for the e-mail they
>receive. The paper junk mail I get comes free of charge, the e-mail
>junk does not.

My heart's bleeding.  I believe these same people pay for their news
including all the bitching that has gone on regarding this topic.  The
volume of which has grossly exceed that of the junk mail.  I believe
these underpriviledged people who have to pay also pay for non-junk-but-
unsolicited mail, flame response mail, bounced mail and so on.  Like I
said, my heart bleeds.

John

-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
Performance Engineering Magazine (TM) |
Marietta, Ga                         |Interested in high tech and computers? 
jgd@dixie.com                        |Write me about PE Magazine
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.
Xref: sparky comp.mail.misc:3374 news.admin.misc:156
From: frampton@vicuna.ocunix.on.ca (Steve Frampton)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,news.admin.misc
Subject: Re: More unsolicited advertising e-mail.
Date: 13 Oct 92 10:43:12 GMT
Reply-To: frampton@vicuna.ocunix.on.ca
Organization: Vicuna Systems, Kingston, ON (613) 547-5066
Content-Type: text

emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti) writes:

> I got a copy, and there seem to be a bunch of people on the one-time
> mailing list set up to send out the advertisement who are busy being
> confused about how to get off the mailing list.
> 
> beta.lanl.gov is a site on ESnet, the Department of Energy "Energy
> Sciences" network funded by the US Gov't.  Of all networks, ESnet has some
> of the most restrictive policies, essentially limiting the use of their
> net to only activities critical to the agencies involved, and explicitly
> *not* a public infrastructure role a la NSFnet.  They tend to be pretty
> finicky about it, to the point of being antsy when commercial sites hook
> up to the internet, and absolutely paranoid about certain European nets
> getting connected.

This has gotten much worse -- apparently there are about 401 people on
this list, and I am getting dozens of messages each day by people CC'ing
the mailing list address when they send "Please remove me" messages to
the perpetrator (so much for his potential customers :-)  ).

There is alot of confusion and anger over this out there.  Many people
have mentioned in their hate mail that they are curious as to where this
person got the names...I'm willing to bet 99% of them voted for the
creation of the 'sci.fractals' group.

I did, but because it seemed a reasonable group, not because I have the
slightest interest in fractals.  So much for "target audiences".

Hope this dies down soon...I'm surprised it hasn't already, however...
I mean, it's Tuesday already -- when is "The Government" going to step
in?

--------------------------------------------------------
Steve Frampton -- frampton@vicuna.ocunix.on.ca
Vicuna Systems BBS  (613) 547-5066  [9600 v.32/v.42 bis]
Xref: sparky comp.mail.misc:3290 news.admin.misc:104
From: martelli@cadlab.sublink.org (Alex Martelli)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,news.admin.misc
Subject: Re: Question about unsolicited Internet Email.
Keywords: question legal use email
Date: 6 Oct 92 12:14:31 GMT
Organization: CAD.LAB S.p.A., Bologna, Italia

alawrenc@sobeco.com (a.lawrence) writes:

:In <1992Oct3.010042.15366@fwi.uva.nl> casper@fwi.uva.nl (Casper H.S. Dik) writes:
:>cro@socrates.ed.asu.edu (C. R. Oldham) writes:
:>>I received an unsolicited email message from abacus@global.gwinnet.com
:>>today.  It was blatantly advertising the services of Abacus Global
:
:>Same problem here. There are no written rules concerning Usenet,
:>the unwritten rule is that no advertisemnts are sent. ....
:
:Ditto.  I tried  to  bouce their message back to them but it was returned
:"address unknow".

What CREEPS!  They also sent the same unsolicited message to me, here
in Italy, including such ROFL sentences as "we speak your language"
(they DON'T! speak Italian actually, just marketspeak!) AND advertising
opening times designed such that taking timezones into account they
would NEVER coincide with Italian office hours, AND as main contact
points *800*-numbers (which CANNOT be called from Italy...!).  Just
to underscore that they just sent it to "everybody" without even the
common courtesy of checking AT ALL for the appropriateness of the
message for the adresseee... CREEPS, as I said.
-- 
Email: martelli@cadlab.sublink.org                   Phone: ++39 (51) 6130360
CAD.LAB s.p.a., v. Ronzani 7/29, Casalecchio, Italia   Fax: ++39 (51) 6130294 
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,news.admin.misc
From: kdenning@portal.hq.videocart.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: Question about unsolicited Internet Email.
Summary: There must be some misunderstanding. :-)
Keywords: question legal use email
Organization: VideOcart Inc.
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 16:03:26 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.134552.28923@news2.cis.umn.edu> fin@unet.umn.edu (Craig A. Finseth) writes:
>In article <Bvz690.2L3@portal.hq.videocart.com>, kdenning@portal.hq.videocart.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
>|> 
>|> Well, I believe I find myself agreeing with John here...
>|> 
>|> The network we're connected to here at work (Alternet) SPECIFICALLY permits
>|> commercial conduct.  Moreover, they give you pretty free reign with the pipe
>	...
>|> This is NOT how some providers work.  Not all of them have a R&E AUP - some
>|> have an even MORE restrictive AUP than the NSF -- even some who are 
>|> commercial.  Some providers explicitly forbid third-party traffic, as an 
>|> example.
>|> 
>|> However, if a network wishes to filter traffic based on some AUP, it is
>|> THEIR responsibility to do so.  NOT the originator -- as long as the point
>|> of origin and the network they connect to says their conduct is "ok".
>|> Therefore, since I am in the US, in Illinois, the material I post to the net
>
>Two points to consider:
>
>1) When an organization connects to NSFNET, it agrees to be
>responsible for refraining from sending non-acceptable traffic to
>NSFNET.  It is up to this orgranization to determine how to fulfull
>this obligation.  If the organization is a common carrier or other
>commerical organization, one way of fulfilling this obligation would
>be to educate all of its customers about the restriction.

When an organization connects to a COMMERCIAL network provider, they do not
necessarily connect to the NSFNET (in fact, they don't at all).  Therefore,
the NSF AUP does not apply.

If the provider passes the traffic ANYWAY then it is their problem, or the
recipients.

Alternet provides services to commercial entities, and does not
automatically connect you to the NSF core (unless you ask).  Therefore, the
issue is just not there for those sites which haven't asked.

Again, if the message >somehow< gets to the NSF core  while you have not
agreed to the AUP, then the originator is not responsible.

>2) In general, it is not possible to examine a particular piece of
>traffic and determine >from it alone< whether it meets AUP needs.  You
>must understand who sent it, who received it, and what it is for.
>This is why NSF has chosen (well, been forced to) to require the
>orginiator to take responsibility.

Only if the originator has agreed to the policy and wants their routes
announced.  Otherwise, its not their problem.

-- 
Karl Denninger 		Inet:  kdenning@hq.videocart.com
VideOcart Inc.		Voice: (312) 987-5022
From: cstila@uta.fi (Timo Laitinen)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Missing e-mail address - help!
Date: 7 Oct 92 15:54:23 GMT
Organization: University of Tampere, Finland

I'd like to know e-mail address of Marko Laine, who studies at the
university of Ulm (Germany). I know university's address, but I can't
find him with using 'finger'. Could you help me!

Thanks, Timo

e-mail address: cstila@kielo.uta.fi
From: leonp@cs.kun.nl (Leon Pillich)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Mail reader for atari?
Date: 12 Oct 92 21:05:42 GMT
Organization: University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Hello verybody,
I'm rather new to this subject so I don't know if this is a FAQ.
A friend of mine downloaded a program from simtel called: readmail
This program was written by J. Schippe. I like this program
very much. It is a nice program to read files that are in usenet format
or mbox format etc.
Problem is:
I own an Atari-st instead of a pc so I need an atari mail reader.
The email adress of J. Schippe mentioned in readmail.doc seems to be
no longer valid.

I'm also willing to part a readmail application if nothing else is possible.
Sources should be in C.

Thnx,

Leon Pillich
University of Nijmegen, Holland
email: leonp@cs.kun.nl
-------------------------------------------------------------
 Life is what's happening when you're making other plans ...
                                      John Lennon
From: martelli@cadlab.sublink.org (Alex Martelli)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Re: Helpful Tips For This week
Date: 14 Oct 92 07:34:59 GMT
Organization: CAD.LAB S.p.A., Bologna, Italia

rsingh@goliath.Stanford.EDU (   raj) writes:
	...
:Hmm.... here we go again.  I just called these guys and an idiot named
:"Antonio Dios" thinks he's doing us all a favor with. His reasoning is
:that .misc in the newsgroup name implies anything goes.

Including the linelength > 80 characters which they used in this irrelevant
message?  My but are those guys CREEPS!  Good object lesson in how NOT to
conduct marketing, EVER, though.
-- 
Email: martelli@cadlab.sublink.org                   Phone: ++39 (51) 6130360
CAD.LAB s.p.a., v. Ronzani 7/29, Casalecchio, Italia   Fax: ++39 (51) 6130294 
Xref: sparky comp.mail.misc:3368 news.admin.misc:153
From: darcy@druid.uucp (D'Arcy J.M. Cain)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,news.admin.misc
Subject: Re: Question about unsolicited Internet Email.
Date: 13 Oct 92 11:41:18 GMT
Organization: D'Arcy Cain Consulting

jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu writes:
>As for these messages appearing on "foreign" (relative to the USA)
>networks, well...  *you* folks voluntarily connected to our
>network(s).  That places _some_ responsibility for appropriateness 
>of traffic on you.

What a parochial and narrow minded view.  So the United States is the
centre (*) of the Universe and everyone else revolves around them eh?
Sorry but even if your view were historically true it isn't true today.
The rest of us aren't here under sufferance of the U.S.

>[Question:  Has the sum total of traffic in these newsgroups reached the
>volume of the original e-mail postings everyone is yammering about yet?]

Yes, I think yours pushed it over the top.  What's your point?

>"Knowing how things work is the basis for appreciation,
>and is thus a source of civilized delight."  -- William Safire

Have you read your sig lately?

(*) If you think I misspelled centre you're being parochial again.

-- 
D'Arcy J.M. Cain (darcy@druid.com)  |
D'Arcy Cain Consulting              |   There's no government
Toronto, Ontario, Canada            |   like no government!
+1 416 424 2871          DoD#0082   |
Xref: sparky comp.mail.misc:3342 news.admin.misc:141
From: frampton@vicuna.ocunix.on.ca (Steve Frampton)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,news.admin.misc
Subject: More unsolicited advertising e-mail.
Date: 11 Oct 92 19:22:01 GMT
Reply-To: frampton@vicuna.ocunix.on.ca
Organization: Vicuna Systems, Kingston, ON (613) 547-5066
Content-Type: text

Hi everyone:

Well, the advertising weasels strike again!

I just received the following message from a government site, no less!
The 'To:' address appears to be a mailing list expander so there's no
telling how many other people have received this.  Boy, haven't these
people learned from Abacus's mistake?

Now, I *pay* for my e-mail and news.  This has just cost the co-op to 
which I belong transport costs to get it here via UUNET, as well as my 
long distance costs to get it to my site.  I have no problem with this, 
but I *really* get angry when I have to pay for the subsidization of 
someone else's advertising...no matter *what* "Dixie" says contrary to 
this.

I understand this has cost all of about 6 cents, but if this kind of
trend continues and increases, pretty soon it won't be a 6 cent cost
anymore, will it?!

The purpose of this post is three-fold:

1.  Has anyone else received a copy of this?
2.  To get the discouraging letters flowing to prevent this again.
3.  Surely a *government* site will take swift action against this?

-----begin excerpt-------------------------------------------------------

> Date:   Sun, 11 Oct 1992 08:23:36 -0400
> From:   rsilver@beta.lanl.gov (Roland Silver)
> Message-Id: <9210111223.AA02014@beta.lanl.gov>
> To:     rsml1@beta.lanl.gov
> Subject: fractal newsletter
>
> I publish a newsletter about fractals called Amygdala (29 issues so 
> far) which you may be interested in.

[...stuff deleted...]

> The price for 10 issues, including First Class / Air Mail postage, is
> US $28.20; Canada/Mexico $32.00; Other $39.00
>
> If you're eager to subscribe, you can email me your order with 
> VISA/MasterCard number and expiration date.

[...even more stuff deleted...]

-----end excerpt---------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------
Steve Frampton  -  frampton@vicuna.ocunix.on.ca
Vicuna Systems BBS - 613/547-5066 [9600 v.32/.42bis]
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,news.admin.misc
From: fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald)
Subject: Re: Question about unsolicited Internet Email.
Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 03:34:43 GMT
Keywords: question legal use email

wpns@miki.pictel.com (Willie Smith) writes:

> Well, I dunno, it seems to me that a flamefest and mailbombing run on
> everyone who does such a thing will eventually ensure that newcomers
> will get the word as soon as they get their network connection.  Kind
> of "Welcome to the net, be sure not to make the following mistakes."

Why should the provider give a damn what kind of mistakes their new
customers make?  They have no incentive whatsoever to provide a list like
that.  Especially considering the number of mistakes there are to be
made - the list would have to be delivered on a forklift, and no newbie
could possibly remember them all.

"Mistake #172563: When posting a followup, always check the 'Followup-To:'
   header to make sure it doesn't contain misc.test."

> [BTW: I didn't get the junk mail, didn't send anything to the idiots
> who sent it out, and think the folks who sold them network services
> should have ensured they knew what the net _was_ before taking their
> money.]

No network provider does this.  None ever will.

-- 
Tom Fitzgerald   Wang Labs       fitz@wang.com   "I went to the universe today;
1-508-967-5278   Lowell MA, USA                   It was closed...."
Xref: sparky comp.mail.misc:3385 news.admin.misc:166
From: frampton@vicuna.ocunix.on.ca (Steve Frampton)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,news.admin.misc
Subject: Re: More unsolicited advertising e-mail.
Date: 14 Oct 92 11:51:00 GMT
Reply-To: frampton@vicuna.ocunix.on.ca
Organization: Vicuna Systems, Kingston, ON (613) 547-5066
Content-Type: text

amillar@netcom.com (Alan Millar) writes:

> John is only guilty of not including a disclaimer for the humor-impaired.
> 
> Go back and read it again.  This time imagine you hear sarcasm.

Well, I certainly don't think so.  John's posting, combined with a 
equally unpleasant e-mail message, seemed a little more than scarcasm to 
me.  Plus consider the fact that John is a commercial site charging his 
users for net.access (this is fine, he is providing a service and he 
should be able to recover costs and something for his time) -- but he 
can't distinguish between this and sending unsolicited advertisements via 
news or mail -- at the recipients expense.

> The point was that Steve Frampton's quote included the advertising, thereby
> propagating it.  I'm sure Steve didn't intend it, which is what was
> meant by "Even when you don't mean to" above.

You're absolutely wrong -- I did *not* include the advertising.  I 
included only so much of it as to give people an idea as to what I was 
complaining about, and *specifically* deleted the contact address, about 
50-75 lines of "Why should you purchase this", and other related 
diatribe.

I suggest you read a thread from the beginning before commenting on it.

--------------------------------------------------------
Steve Frampton -- frampton@vicuna.ocunix.on.ca
Vicuna Systems BBS  (613) 547-5066  [9600 v.32/v.42 bis]
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,news.admin.misc
From: quirk@pioneer.unm.edu (Gym Z. Quirk)
Subject: Re: Question about unsolicited Internet Email.
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 92 23:42:05 GMT
Organization: Nit-Pickers for a Better Tomorow Afternoon
Keywords: question legal use email

In article <1992Oct9.153359.4787@miki.pictel.com> wpns@miki.pictel.com (Willie Smith) writes:
>Well, I dunno, it seems to me that a flamefest and mailbombing run on
>everyone who does such a thing will eventually ensure that newcomers
>will get the word as soon as they get their network connection.  Kind
>of "Welcome to the net, be sure not to make the following mistakes."

How many new users read news.announce.important or news.announce.newusers
when they first hit the net?

>Willie Smith
>wpns@pictel.com
>
>[BTW: I didn't get the junk mail, didn't send anything to the idiots
>who sent it out, and think the folks who sold them network services
>should have ensured they knew what the net _was_ before taking their
>money.]

The problem is, of course, that no two people's definition of 'the
net' are exactly the same.
-- 
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk  (Known to some as Taki Kogoma)  quirk@pioneer.unm.edu
 I'll get a life when someone demonstrates that it would be superior to
                          what I have now...
Xref: sparky comp.mail.misc:3398 news.admin.misc:168
From: short@asf.com (Lee Short)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,news.admin.misc
Subject: Re: Question about unsolicited Internet Email.
Keywords: question legal use email
Date: 13 Oct 92 21:14:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: asf.1992Oct13.211451.9608
Organization: Hughes Training, Inc.

In some stupid article jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>
>There he goes with that "we" crap again.  What is it with a few of you
>Brits that you think you're involved in internal American affairs?
>Or even know enough to intelligently comment?

Ahh, that wonderful American diplomacy at work again!  :-)

It's refreshing to know that the European stereotype of Americans as
brash know-it-alls who think they own the world has some basis in
reality.  

I suppose IRA bomb threats emailed to the sysadmin at Oxford from the
guest account at Stanford would be an "internal American affair" as
well?

>More to the point, Gwinnette and Dixie are similarly configured commercial
>public access sites.  I maintain multiple commercial network connections
>in addition to those with academic institutions such as Emory.  I do that
>for reliability and to insulate myself from policy vagrancies that may
>arise from any one connection site.
>
>This hypothetical really brings the issue to a head.  It points out that
>if some net does not want a certain kind of traffic, it is its 
>responsibility to do the filtering.  

I see.  Even if the network you connect to has restrictions on what is
acceptable traffic, it is their responsibility to filter out traffic
which doesn't meet those restrictions, even if you've agreed to meet
said restrictions.  

>     Since there is no "commercial"
>bit in the IP header, the whole concept is silly.  

Have you ever stopping ranting for long enough to consider *why there
is no such bit*?  

>     The "solution" to
>your problem is the one I suggested a few days ago. Either pull the 
>plug or accept the net as it exists.
>
>John

The solution to *our* problem is called cooperation.  Evidently this
is a concept new to you.  

May you be cursed with the network you think you want.  

Lee
-- 
short@asf.com              I'll believe in Virtual Reality when they create 
Lee Short                           the first virtual beer.  
Software Janitor        I speak for none of the many steps in the food chain
Hughes Training, Inc.         between myself and General Motors corporation.
From: craig@ec.uwa.oz.au (Craig Richmond - division)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Re: Helpful Tips For This week
Date: 14 Oct 1992 04:44:04 GMT
Organization: The University of Westrn Australia
NNTP-Posting-Host: decel.ecel.uwa.edu.au

abacus@global.Gwinnett.COM writes:


>			ABACUS GLOBAL SUPPORT, INC.
>  			  HELPFULL HINTS ON 1-2-3
>			      FOR PCs AND MACs

When I first saw this, I didn't bother replying because it quite clearly
had to be a forged posting.  Quite a good one I had to admit, so I followed
it no further.  Now seeing postings from people who have phoned them I have
to eat my words.  Tell them to get a biz newsgroup created for this junk
and to leave the non-commercial hierarchies alone.

Craig
--
Craig Richmond.  Computer Officer -  Dept of Economics (morning) 380 3860
  University of Western Australia    Dept of Education (afternoon)
craig@ecel.uwa.edu.au Dvorak Keyboards RULE!  "Messes are only acceptable
if users make them.  Applications aren't allowed this freedom" I.M.VI 2-4
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc