BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Doug Yanega <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Discussion of Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 9 Mar 1996 20:08:27 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (86 lines)
Apologies for this, I'll try to keep it as brief as possible, given its
potential importance - and others here may well benefit from some info...
    I received two direct e-mail Spams (mass-mailings) today, both from
"multi-level marketing" (MLM) entrepreneurs. These folks engage in
marginally legal, and plainly unethical Pyramid-type activities which
typically involve buying lists of names (nowadays mostly e-mail lists, when
it used to be mailing addresses) and then trying to recruit people on that
list to join the Pyramid. The fact that I received two in one day suggests
that someone has obtained a list with my e-mail address, and as their
preferred targets are listserv lists, THIS LIST may have been "tapped" by
MLMers. Most of you may not be aware, but a few days ago, there was a rash
of false listserv subscriptions, all across the Internet. There is a chance
(yes, this is speculation, but there's a good reason for it) that these
false subscriptions were simply so MLMers could subscribe, send a REVIEW
command to the listservs, and get complete lists of subscribers. I'm not
saying this *did* happen, only that it might have.
        Now, if I were to ask everyone on this list who has suddenly
started to receive MLM Spam in their personal mail to write back to me, and
I'm *right*, my mailbox will get flooded. Likewise if I asked you to write
back to the list (DO NOT!). Instead I'll make the following requests: (1)
if you have received such messages (see below), and your last name begins
with "B", then send me an e-mail. Maybe we can figure out if any of these
listservs have been tapped, and this will help coordinate anti-spam
measures. (2) Never simply delete such messages - consider what happens if
these "marketing" techniques proliferate. Today you receive two 2-page
Spams. Next it's up to a dozen a week, then 3 dozen, then 100, and
ultimately it could well reach the point where simply *having* an e-mail
account guarantees that you will receive several thousand advertisements a
week. Bearing in mind the Internet *is* international, the odds are
virtually zero that legislation will ever exist to prevent this. Only
concerted pressure from Internet *users* can ever preserve the Internet for
our use, so we MUST complain, and prevent direct e-mail marketing from
*ever* being profitable. The problem is knowing *where* to complain, since
many Spammers use forged addresses and mail paths (and some intentionally
alter them so as to point blame at innocent third parties), or run their
OWN sites. The only effective complaints are those directed to whomever
*supplies* the Spammers with their Internet connections. Those of you with
access to Usenet newsgroups should, if you EVER receive mass mailings,
chain letters, etc., refer to the newsgroup news.admin.net-abuse.misc to
see if others have already complained about that particular mailing. By
posting a message there (with the forwarded headers of the Spam attached)
and asking where complaints should be directed, you can find out an
appropriate course of action. If you do not have Usenet access, then
complaints about a Spammer such as [log in to unmask] should go to
[log in to unmask], for example - but be polite, since it could be forged and
you wouldn't know (see below). A few providers such as aol.com and
netcom.com have an "abuse@" address you can complain to. (3) Inform other
people (but not by mass-mailing, of course) to take similar actions -
spread the word. The Net is self-policing, so we can only maintain control
if we ALL do our part. It's that simple.
 
Here's one that I got:
>Comments: Authenticated sender is <[log in to unmask]>
>From: [log in to unmask]
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 11:24:54 +0000
>Subject: You may find this interesting
>Reply-to: [log in to unmask]
>Priority: normal
 
In this case, the sender has been authenticated, so complaints to
[log in to unmask] would be best, while "iadfw.net" might not work. I haven't
checked yet - this could be a site run by MLMers - but I have a standing
message posted to see if anyone can confirm the place to complain. The
other I got was:
 
>Date: Sat, 9 Mar 96 13:51:17 UT
>From: "Sam Meltzer" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Amazing!!
 
And I have confirmed already (others have complained about this one) that
[log in to unmask] is where to complain.
 
Sorry to waste more space on this...but I've been on the Net too long to
sit quietly while others work to render it useless for its original
purpose. I think I'm turning into Howard Beal... ;-)
Sincerely,
 
Doug Yanega       Illinois Natural History Survey, 607 E. Peabody Dr.
Champaign, IL 61820 USA      phone (217) 244-6817, fax (217) 333-4949
 affiliate, Univ. of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Dept. of Entomology
          http://www.inhs.uiuc.edu:80/~dyanega/my_home.html
  "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
        is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82

ATOM RSS1 RSS2