[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ale]OT It begins...

On Thursday 29 January 2004 22:08, Jim Popovitch wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-01-29 at 22:54, ChangingLINKS.com wrote:
> > The fact that I could do this manually supports the argument that at least 
> > some slogging goes on. 
> No it doesn't, and that assertion convinces me that you are just
> learning as you go through this. 

Ok, so I don't know anything about spamming, slogging programs don't exist, 
and whatever you are proposing happened happened. This time, you are 

> How do you come to the conclusion that
> ANY of those email addys come from "slogging", or for that matter
> "blogging", "clogging", or "frogging"? ;) 
> -Jim P.

Ok, you are so funny and l33t. Right on time! 
I would ask you to show me where the email addresses came from, ask you to 
prove that they did NOT come from slogging (even though I showed *how* it is 
possible and offered several alternative origins), or I would ask you AGAIN 
to say what you believed happened, but . . . I realized I'd be wasting my 

1. Whatever your assertion is about the origin of the list is correct.
2. I declare you the "winner" of whatever you wanted to win.
3. Your jokes *are* funny to some, great job?!

Oh, I *think* remember: 
Aren't you the spam expert who recently threatened to "pull out their 
credentials" regarding spam prevention? 
Your perceived spamfighting credentials are hereby honored.
Could you do us a favor and offer a solution, please 
(if not for the global spam problem, then just for our mailing list)?

This just in: 
"Several folks have offered to step up and help remove email addresses from 
the messages in the archives. I think that is a fantastic idea!" 

		There was that one expert who disagreed . . . .

Times up!
Wishing you Happiness, Joy and Laughter,
Drew Brown