From: "Rob McEwen" <r...@invaluement.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 2009/December/15 13:13
jdow wrote:
jdow wrote:
his response personal spam to this account has increased sharply
Uuh, what does that mean, exactly?
A possible cause and effect exists. I can neither prove nor disprove
it. the fact exists.
Still doesn't answer my question. Perhaps I'm "dense". But to spell out
my question more explicitly:
what do you mean by "personal response spam"? Is that just Richard's
on-list responses we've all seen? Or something else? (did I miss that
part of the conversation?). And what do you mean by "to this account"?
To this list? To your own inbox? Are you referring to messages that are
obviously from Richard (including alter-ego ones)? Or some kind of UBE
campaign that you think he is behind? (if so, please describe)
Thank you for spelling it out. I am speaking of spam directed to this
account. That email must be to this address or one of three others
(which showed no increase) in order to get through to our machines.
I use fetchmail for my email and for Loren's several accounts. I can't
say if his spam increased dramatically in the last two days (0000 to
2359:59 PST) or not.
I am speaking of generic spam. I've not noticed a specific type that
has increased. I'm to lazy to look. I have received an unusual number
of "You've won" emails today and yesterday. I've not looked for a
specific style so I left the observation at "increase in spam
received." That in no way accuses anybody of personally sending me
spam. I simply looked at the bulk numbers which took a maybe 20% jump
beyond the normal Monday bounce. This correlation is not nearly as
strong as with the earlier episode.
Given what data and facts I have I am taking anything Richard and his
sock puppets, alter-egos, or fellow conspiracy theorists might suggest
and pretty much tossing it into the intellectual black hole in which
it belongs. And I'm stating that's what I've observed. Now I've stated
what I intend to do about it.
Others here are adults. They an make up their own minds, generate their
own facts, and add them up.
I'll add one other thing, I'm not a fan of Habeas; however, I have seen
reason to give them a modest negative score low enough it will likely
get overridden by a trusted source going rogue. The old Haiku approach
was so bad I had a strong positive score on it. That had colored my
attitudes - the Aw Sh**! vs Brownie Points issue struck again.
{^_^}
