|
Beware- New Ebay "Spoof": Email Fraud
Watch for a "Question from Ebay member"
that takes you to a fraud page on Comcast.net, IP 69.138.144.235 |
These are common.
The basic rule is -- if you're going to check or alter your account, never let e-mail take you to the site. Always type in the name of the site you want to go to. |
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message ... These are common. The basic rule is -- if you're going to check or alter your account, never let e-mail take you to the site. Always type in the name of the site you want to go to. and if you get regular mail from your 'credit card company' or anybody else for that matter, dont call numbers on that paper. call the number on your card. ive caught two scams this way. randy |
One way to spot a fhilshing site is to use an
incorrect password for your account. If it's a legit site, it should complain. If it's a fake, it won't know that the password is wrong. *Unless* the site is trying that password right then and there at the legit site.... SO better not use this method. |
For you Windows 2000 and XP users, give Spoofstick a try at:
http://www.corestreet.com/spoofstick..._explorer.html At least you'll know where you are in cyber space. Watch for a "Question from Ebay member" that takes you to a fraud page on Comcast.net, IP 69.138.144.235 |
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:36:04 UTC, David Stinson
wrote: Watch for a "Question from Ebay member" that takes you to a fraud page on Comcast.net, IP 69.138.144.235 Speaking of the Bay. Anyone know what the story is on the Collins KWM380s that keep coming up for bid? Sure is something odd going on but dang if I know what the point of it is. Almost looks like two scammers are scamming each other. -- |
|
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 13:22:29 UTC, TUFF (John
Goller, k9uwa) wrote: In article , says... Speaking of the Bay. Anyone know what the story is on the Collins KWM380s that keep coming up for bid? Sure is something odd going on but dang if I know what the point of it is. Almost looks like two scammers are scamming each other. looks like two guys are trying to sell them to me.. Hank I know... he is straight guy... I do think that they are both sort of fishing a bit as the normal market price on the radio is about $2800-3000 not any $3500 or 3800..... I used to own a pair of them myself. John k9uwa About a week ago there was a UK vendor selling 4 or 5 KWM380s in separate auctions. Somehow, the bidding got up to over $30,000 each. On one, it might be a typo but the $30,000 price was across the board. Unfortunately I didn't bookmark the auction. de ah6gi/4 |
Lou wrote:
IF you are suspicious about any e-mail stating it is from E-Bay, then you can send it to and they will check it and let you know if it is legit or not. IF it is not legit, you'll know pretty quick. IF it IS legit, they'll tell you that too, and what to do about it. I've never heard anything about them checking and telling you if it is legit. You can send a blank email to that address and get the standard "Its not us" blurb. That pretty much says that ANY email saying its from them - isn't. -BM |
"-exray" wrote in message
... Lou wrote: IF you are suspicious about any e-mail stating it is from E-Bay, then you can send it to and they will check it and let you know if it is legit or not. IF it is not legit, you'll know pretty quick. IF it IS legit, they'll tell you that too, and what to do about it. I've never heard anything about them checking and telling you if it is legit. You can send a blank email to that address and get the standard "Its not us" blurb. That pretty much says that ANY email saying its from them - isn't. -BM Reply to the sender then, see what "they" tell you! That could be an interesting experience. No one has ever said what happens when that was done, with the exception of those who were less fortunate enough to actually send their info to be processed. But then we don't hear them say they gave the info, they cry the blues, they got screwed. Write the "sender" of those messages and report back. Maybe the system isn't perfect, but then if one is dumb enough or let's be polite and say not educated enough in the ways of the internet to know when they're being screwed or not, then even the catch all response won't really matter either. BUT it will at least say - it wasn't from E-Bay - which can then "hopefully" equate in that person's mind as "be careful". It doesn't take much to catch those unsuspecting - off guard. If a person is not up on the things that can happen on here, "nothing" will save that person from being screwed - I don't care how bright they "think" they are or how dumb they actually may be. With some people, unfortunately, "nothing" clicks. You can sit here and preach to them all day on what not to do, and damned if they don't do the opposite. Like a child, you tell them not to touch the hot stove, they do it anyway, to see what happens. People often have to learn the hard way. Instructions - simple or complex - just don't always work with "ALL" people. No, the system is "not" perfect. But until it is, we can only guide them to work "with" it in it's present form - dumb as that may be. I am not aware of anyone sending a blank email to spoof at e-bay, so I can't say what the reply would be. I think I'll try it just for the hell of it. Have "you" tried it to back up your statement? Just curious! TRM. |
"OH YEAH" a écrit dans le message
THIS is what you get when you send a "BLANK" page to E-Bay as stated by BM - above. Try it yourself. You'll see. So much for that theory. ************************************************** ********************** This message is new. Now they request that any email you send them is a "forward" of the suspicious email you received. Try it, "forward" them anything and you will get the "canned" reply. Syl |
OH YEAH wrote:
WHAT? It appears you're quoting ME in your replies. This thread started with someone talking about e-mails "appearing" to be from E-Bay - being received. Others responded with how to perhaps deal with it. I jumped in to say that if one gets a suspicious e-mail THOUGHT to be from E-Bay, they send it to ..... Someone suggested that - that doesn't work, that a blank e-mail would get the same reply. I proved that wrong and posted the result of doing just that. I offered others to try it for themselves. Whoa, I did repeat said test and yes they have changed the format. As Syl said, now it apparently only accepts forwarded mail. Well, I blanked out a forward message and sent it Sunday afternoon. I got the initial canned response immediately and the canned "answer" came thru yesterday evening. Guess what. They said it wasn't from them. Go figure. I wonder if anybody has received one that said is WAS FROM EBAY? I don't think so. The point I was trying to disprove was your assertion that they will inspect these requests and inform you of the results as if some of these emails were valid. In a way they do just that but I don't think there's as much inspection going on as simply hitting the canned "its not us" button. Don't get me wrong, I have no gripe with ebay and have a combined feedback rating of 800 or so. By suggesting that some of these emails merit inspection might lead one to think that some requests for acct info are legit which is simply not the case. -BillM |
"-exray" wrote in message
... OH YEAH wrote: WHAT? It appears you're quoting ME in your replies. This thread started with someone talking about e-mails "appearing" to be from E-Bay - being received. Others responded with how to perhaps deal with it. I jumped in to say that if one gets a suspicious e-mail THOUGHT to be from E-Bay, they send it to ..... Someone suggested that - that doesn't work, that a blank e-mail would get the same reply. I proved that wrong and posted the result of doing just that. I offered others to try it for themselves. Whoa, I did repeat said test and yes they have changed the format. As Syl said, now it apparently only accepts forwarded mail. Well, I blanked out a forward message and sent it Sunday afternoon. I got the initial canned response immediately and the canned "answer" came thru yesterday evening. Guess what. They said it wasn't from them. Go figure. I wonder if anybody has received one that said is WAS FROM EBAY? I don't think so. The point I was trying to disprove was your assertion that they will inspect these requests and inform you of the results as if some of these emails were valid. In a way they do just that but I don't think there's as much inspection going on as simply hitting the canned "its not us" button. Don't get me wrong, I have no gripe with ebay and have a combined feedback rating of 800 or so. By suggesting that some of these emails merit inspection might lead one to think that some requests for acct info are legit which is simply not the case. -BillM Bill, "I" am not trying to argue with you. The fact they just changed formats, well.... if they did it again today, it would still make fools of us both for arguing about what "was". :) Yes, when I tried it I got the response shown, which did prove you wrong - TO A POINT - but not entirely. It still doesn't mean they do "scrutinize" ALL e-mails. Maybe some. I will agree, to a point it is canned. . I'm not saying you are completely wrong or I'm completely correct.. The system isn't the greatest, we can both agree on that. But it is all they offer! So, we deal with it. But what I think is even more hilarious is my statement to you of replying to the spoof sender to see their response, and someone else feels I'd be harassing them by doing so - were it to be done. Man, I laughed my ass off on that. TRM |
"OH YEAH" a écrit dans le message
But what I think is even more hilarious is my statement to you of replying to the spoof sender to see their response, and someone else feels I'd be harassing them by doing so - were it to be done. Man, I laughed my ass off on that. That would be our village idiot... Syl |
"Syl's Old Radioz" wrote in message
... "OH YEAH" a écrit dans le message But what I think is even more hilarious is my statement to you of replying to the spoof sender to see their response, and someone else feels I'd be harassing them by doing so - were it to be done. Man, I laughed my ass off on that. That would be our village idiot... Syl Well, whoever it was, it sure was funny!!!!!!!! TRM |
OH YEAH wrote:
shown, which did prove you wrong - TO A POINT - but not entirely. It still doesn't mean they do "scrutinize" ALL e-mails. Maybe some. I will agree, to a point it is canned. . I'm not saying you are completely wrong or I'm completely correct.. The system isn't the greatest, we can both agree on that. But it is all they offer! So, we deal with it. Well clearly they want the things reported to them so they can get the header info and have the bogus sites shut down as rapidly as possible. And they seem to do a good job of that. I wonder what kind of SWAT team they have that can get a page pulled on a server in Romania within hours? Maybe we should send THEM after Osama! Its still disingenuous and misleading for me, you, them or anybody else to suggest that the answer might be anything other "its not from us". Next thing ya know the phishers will start sending out bogus replies saying "yes, that was us, please log in and give us your info". Some people have a hard time understanding the level of fraud that exists on the internet. I knew a lady on another forum who got bitten TWICE with those phony Microsoft emails that told you to delete such and such file. When she got chastised for doing it the second time her response was "Why would Microsoft send me phony emails?". She just didn't get it. I guess ebay has an overdose of that mentality around which they have to tailor their procedures. -Bill |
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 20:26:17 -0600, -exray
wrote: OH YEAH wrote: shown, which did prove you wrong - TO A POINT - but not entirely. It still doesn't mean they do "scrutinize" ALL e-mails. Maybe some. I will agree, to a point it is canned. . I'm not saying you are completely wrong or I'm completely correct.. The system isn't the greatest, we can both agree on that. But it is all they offer! So, we deal with it. Well clearly they want the things reported to them so they can get the header info and have the bogus sites shut down as rapidly as possible. Not really. It depends mainly on the integrity of the site hosting the problem. A forward of the problem post/e-mail *with headers* to a good ISP will cause them to check. If they come up with anything that user is gone. And they seem to do a good job of that. I wonder what kind of SWAT team they have that can get a page pulled on a server in Romania within hours? Maybe we should send THEM after Osama! OTOH there are sites stateside and off shore where catching some one is like pulling teeth or they just move to the server setting beside the one they were using. Its still disingenuous and misleading for me, you, them or anybody else to suggest that the answer might be anything other "its not from us". Next thing ya know the phishers will start sending out bogus replies saying "yes, that was us, please log in and give us your info". Some people have a hard time understanding the level of fraud that It's more than some people. A recent survey turned up less than 25% of the users on the net have a firewall. I'd guess it's probably around 15%. Most have the mentality that it won't happen to me and I only open attachments from friends and they'd never send me a virus. They don't realize most viruses come from someone who had them in their address book. exists on the internet. I knew a lady on another forum who got bitten TWICE with those phony Microsoft emails that told you to delete such and such file. When she got chastised for doing it the second time her response was "Why would Microsoft send me phony emails?". She just didn't get it. I guess ebay has an overdose of that mentality around which they have to tailor their procedures. I'm not going to say the average user, but rather most users are completely clueless about computers, the Internet, viruses and scams. They have to be or I wouldn't be winning some lottery or another at least 4 or 5 times a week and being contacted by some guys widow, his estate's law firm, or some government official to get help moving many millions of dollars out of their country. When I was in Grad School I taught 5 classes at the university level as a GA. They were "The Introduction to Computer Science". I had 195 students and their level of computer literacy was scary. I had one genius who picked up another students floppy disk which had her home work on it. He turned it in as his own without ever even changing the name. Of course he claimed it was an accident and the disks must have gotten mixed up, but as he sat between me and my boss (head of the department) I've never seen a kid sweat that much. We should have put a drip pan under him. Although that was in 91, things haven't changed all that much. Computer science was involved in virtually every class at that point. One other note. I wrote a rather elaborate database search program that from the user end was strictly a "click on what you wanted to do and "fill-in-the-blanks". Still, it took days to train 6 people how to use it and it was the same questions, over and over for a full week. The next year I had a "trainer" to teach the same people. :-)) People tend to fall into three camps. Those who have at least an idea as to what is going on, those who place blind faith in the computer's ability to do what ever with out fault, and those who are intimidated by them. Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com -Bill |
Roger wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 20:26:17 -0600, -exray wrote: Well clearly they want the things reported to them so they can get the header info and have the bogus sites shut down as rapidly as possible. Not really. It depends mainly on the integrity of the site hosting the problem. A forward of the problem post/e-mail *with headers* to a good ISP will cause them to check. If they come up with anything that user is gone. "Not really"? Are we disagreeing about something? OTOH there are sites stateside and off shore where catching some one is like pulling teeth or they just move to the server setting beside the one they were using. They may move on, most spammers do, and often its a case of hijacking a server so he as an individual is gone already. What amazes me is how fast these Romanian (not to pick on Romanians in particular but you get the gist) websites get closed down. ebay obviously carries some clout. Maybe they call Donald Rumsfeld first and have him threaten to come over and look for WMDs. That can get nasty. I'm not going to say the average user, but rather most users are completely clueless about computers, the Internet, viruses and scams. Roger, we are preaching to the choir. These spam and fraud issues are almost daily subjects (ad nauseum) on any internet forum such as this one. Hell, these scams get reported on the evening network news. You'd have to live in a cave...seems that quite a few people do! -Bill |
"-exray" wrote in message
... OH YEAH wrote: shown, which did prove you wrong - TO A POINT - but not entirely. It still doesn't mean they do "scrutinize" ALL e-mails. Maybe some. I will agree, to a point it is canned. . I'm not saying you are completely wrong or I'm completely correct.. The system isn't the greatest, we can both agree on that. But it is all they offer! So, we deal with it. Well clearly they want the things reported to them so they can get the header info and have the bogus sites shut down as rapidly as possible. And they seem to do a good job of that. I wonder what kind of SWAT team they have that can get a page pulled on a server in Romania within hours? Maybe we should send THEM after Osama! Its still disingenuous and misleading for me, you, them or anybody else to suggest that the answer might be anything other "its not from us". Next thing ya know the phishers will start sending out bogus replies saying "yes, that was us, please log in and give us your info". Some people have a hard time understanding the level of fraud that exists on the internet. I knew a lady on another forum who got bitten TWICE with those phony Microsoft emails that told you to delete such and such file. When she got chastised for doing it the second time her response was "Why would Microsoft send me phony emails?". She just didn't get it. I guess ebay has an overdose of that mentality around which they have to tailor their procedures. -Bill Points well taken and I couldn't agree more. TRM |
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:56:12 -0600, -exray
wrote: Roger wrote: On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 20:26:17 -0600, -exray wrote: Well clearly they want the things reported to them so they can get the header info and have the bogus sites shut down as rapidly as possible. Not really. It depends mainly on the integrity of the site hosting the problem. A forward of the problem post/e-mail *with headers* to a good ISP will cause them to check. If they come up with anything that user is gone. "Not really"? Are we disagreeing about something? Probably not. I was referring to the remark about they must have a lot of pull or influence, or something to that effect :-)) snip Roger, we are preaching to the choir. These spam and fraud issues are almost daily subjects (ad nauseum) on any internet forum such as this one. Hell, these scams get reported on the evening network news. You'd have to live in a cave...seems that quite a few people do! When you consider (I think the number is 20%) of the computers hooked to the net are infected It's one whale of a lot. :-)) Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com -Bill |
"Roger" wrote in message
... On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:56:12 -0600, -exray wrote: Roger wrote: On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 20:26:17 -0600, -exray wrote: Well clearly they want the things reported to them so they can get the header info and have the bogus sites shut down as rapidly as possible. Not really. It depends mainly on the integrity of the site hosting the problem. A forward of the problem post/e-mail *with headers* to a good ISP will cause them to check. If they come up with anything that user is gone. "Not really"? Are we disagreeing about something? Probably not. I was referring to the remark about they must have a lot of pull or influence, or something to that effect :-)) snip Roger, we are preaching to the choir. These spam and fraud issues are almost daily subjects (ad nauseum) on any internet forum such as this one. Hell, these scams get reported on the evening network news. You'd have to live in a cave...seems that quite a few people do! When you consider (I think the number is 20%) of the computers hooked to the net are infected It's one whale of a lot. :-)) Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com -Bill MUCH tougher laws and punishments are needed - to "help" out in this area. I say help, because it won't be a total and/or immediate cure. Though some laws are coming out, they're slow and "untested". This is still a "new" arena for the law makers, many of whom no doubt are still stuck in the stone ages - mentally. They fail to keep up with "current" demands and issues. 20% if that is the number, is pretty steep - and that isn't taking into account the many who get online - new - each day. They get sucked into this not knowing what to expect. Be it ripped off or a damned virus. My opinion, take all those ass holes out - responsible for that - and execute them. They're not worth any more than the terrorists we're trying to protect the citizenry from in other areas. Once people see stiffer punishments being carried out, they may stop and think about doing it again (if they've not been caught yet) or in the future. This country is getting more and more like the lawless Wild West. Laws are put into effect every day, yet more and more are being broken just as fast. What good are laws, if not adhered to? To those who "may" be new on here, DO NOT trust "everything" you read, especially any e-mails coming your way - in particular from strangers. BEFORE you open up any files - even in newsgroups, READ some comments from those who've been around or know the tricks that are used by the scum bags. It could save you some grief. I got an e-mail the other day from a friend of mine which reported 3 of the competing Online Servers are suing some people who were accused of sending out canned spam - as per the Can Spam act. Spam which has no traceable address or at least no way to tell them to drop you from their list. Will they win? We'll have to wait and see. Will it stop them from doing it again? Who knows. Some people never learn. Stay tuned! TRM |
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 10:14:33 -0400, "OH YEAH"
wrote: "Roger" wrote in message .. . On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:56:12 -0600, -exray wrote: Roger wrote: On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 20:26:17 -0600, -exray wrote: Well clearly they want the things reported to them so they can get the header info and have the bogus sites shut down as rapidly as possible. Not really. It depends mainly on the integrity of the site hosting the problem. A forward of the problem post/e-mail *with headers* to a good ISP will cause them to check. If they come up with anything that user is gone. "Not really"? Are we disagreeing about something? Probably not. I was referring to the remark about they must have a lot of pull or influence, or something to that effect :-)) snip Roger, we are preaching to the choir. These spam and fraud issues are almost daily subjects (ad nauseum) on any internet forum such as this one. Hell, these scams get reported on the evening network news. You'd have to live in a cave...seems that quite a few people do! When you consider (I think the number is 20%) of the computers hooked to the net are infected It's one whale of a lot. :-)) Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com -Bill MUCH tougher laws and punishments are needed - to "help" out in this area. I say help, because it won't be a total and/or immediate cure. Though some laws are coming out, they're slow and "untested". This is still a "new" arena for the law makers, many of whom no doubt are still stuck in the stone ages - mentally. They fail to keep up with "current" demands and issues. 20% if that is the number, is pretty steep - and that isn't taking into account the many who get online - new - each day. They get sucked into this not knowing what to expect. Be it ripped off or a damned virus. My opinion, take all those ass holes out - responsible for that - and execute them. They're not worth any more than the terrorists we're trying to protect the citizenry from in other areas. Once people see stiffer punishments being carried out, they may stop and think about doing it again (if they've not been caught yet) or in the future. This country is getting more and more like the lawless Wild West. Laws are put into effect every day, yet more and more are being broken just as fast. What good are laws, if not adhered to? Although some will think this off topic I think it pretty well pertains to all newsgroups. Sorry about getting long winded. To those who "may" be new on here, DO NOT trust "everything" you read, especially any e-mails coming your way - in particular from strangers. And don't trust attachments even if they are from friends unless you are expecting them. In general you are most likely to receive a virus from someone who has you in their address book. No one should be on the net without a firewall and virus checker. ISPs are talking about blocking customers with infected machines and not letting them back on until they can prove the machine is clean and safe with an up-to-date firewall and virus checker. If all of these infected machines were booted off it would remove one of the current main tools for spreading viruses and spam AND it would make the end users far more diligent about keeping up-to-date and practicing safe computing. BEFORE you open up any files - even in newsgroups, READ some comments from those who've been around or know the tricks that are used by the scum bags. It could save you some grief. I got an e-mail the other day from a friend of mine which reported 3 of the competing Online Servers are suing some people who were accused of sending out canned spam - as per the Can Spam act. Spam which has no traceable address or at least no way to tell them to drop you from their list. Will they win? We'll have to wait and see. Will it stop them from doing it again? Who knows. Some people never learn. Stay tuned! First, to the newbies and some not so new. As TRM said; never open a link in a post that contains nothing except the link, or wait until at least several others have opened it first and commented on it. Don't even open the posts that appear to be out of place on a news group such as "so and so caught naked", or along those lines. The links can take you to sites that can plant malicious code on your computer. Code that can log key strokes and give others access to your computer and the files on it. Some of that code will download thousands of adds, and addresses, turning *YOUR* computer into a spam spewing zombie. As I mentioned before; as I recall, the last figures I saw estimate that over 20% of the personal computers on line are infected with viruses, worms, or have been turned into spam spewing zombies. That is millions of computers! It's no wonder the net is slow at times. A recent article titled "20 Minutes" said the average "unprotected computer" hooked to broadband such as cable will be infected within 20 minutes. As a wake up call, when I went to a page last week I had a window pop open to ask where I wanted to save the file? What file? I hadn't tried to download anything. Just visit a page I visit nearly every day. A quick view of the source code on their page showed it was trying to install a program on my machine. His page was infected! My firewall, virus checker, choice of browser, and browser settings saved my machine. The "Can Spam Act", better known in computing circles as "Eat Your Spam Act", is a prime example of the unknowing trying to regulate something. It requires the sender include a Click here to Remove from the mailing list, when in fact any one in-the-know, knows better than to reply to any spam in any manner except to the abuse desk at where ever. That many use this method to verify the address seems lost on the law makers. Of course they managed to exclude them selves, charities, and religious organizations for some strange reason. At least they did include the requirement for a valid reply to address which is about the only thing the spammers are getting caught by. OTOH some ISPs such as AOL are taking some of them to court in civil actions. I'm pretty sure they will win the specific cases, but I don't see it as much of a deterrent. The spam and scams are just too lucrative. Even if they only received 1/10 of one percent returns they are making fortunes and by that I mean many millions of dollars. Another reason for not using HTML mail readers, or turning it off. Opening an HTML mail to see what's in it can easily verify the address and any adds opened count as money in the spammer's pockets. I do think that the companies in the adds should also be held responsible. I called one well known company to complain about spam and pop-up adds for their company. The response: "We just hire the advertising company. We aren't responsible for the way they advertise our product". As a final note, Never, Ever, click on a link in an e-mail to up-date your operating system. If you use Windows never use any route except "Windows Update", or by going directly to the proper MS site. Don't use the links in an e-mail to get there either. I could write many pages on how to do "safe computing" but the ones who need it wouldn't read it because they know it'll never happen to them. Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com TRM |
|
"John Goller, k9uwa" wrote in message news:uD6hd.39271$R05.23442@attbi_s53... In article , says... Its real simple... until Spammers and Virus writers on a world wide basis are simply taken out and "Shot at Dawn" it won't stop! The penalty has to be stiff enough that they won't do it. As my Dearly Departed Father said... some have to feel pain to understand. John k9uwa That was my point - exactly! While we're at it, take out all the rest of the scum and do likewise. After all, you do need a "shot" to cure the ills. Inoculate "permanently" - all of them. TRM |
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 14:27:38 GMT, TUFF (John
Goller, k9uwa) wrote: In article , says... Its real simple... until Spammers and Virus writers on a world wide basis are simply taken out and "Shot at Dawn" it won't stop! The penalty has to be stiff enough that they won't do it. Why wait until dawn? -- Email replies to: n2hqc ((AT)) earthlink ((DOT)) net CompTIA Certifications: A+ Technician, Network+, iNet+ 3-year Cancer Survivor, and still cancer-free. URL: http://home.comcast.net/~n2hqc PGP-Key-ID: 0x08D960D3 |
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 19:31:06 GMT, Jack wrote:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 14:27:38 GMT, TUFF (John Goller, k9uwa) wrote: In article , says... Its real simple... until Spammers and Virus writers on a world wide basis are simply taken out and "Shot at Dawn" it won't stop! The penalty has to be stiff enough that they won't do it. Why wait until dawn? Because the shoot-em-all lunatics know they'd just kill themselves and miss the target in the circular firing squads they set up at night? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:36 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com