What exactly is my server purportedly doing?

[knotwork]

Hi, I came here due to a multiple-bounced email address that Fedora Core 2's "mailman" system reported to me as having bounced enough times to have caused the subscription to be suspended.

Looking at mailman's report of the offending bounce, I found:

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 11:54:37 -0300

From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON[at]websites.knotwork.com>

To: makemoney-bounces[at]websites.knotwork.com

Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details

The original message was received at Sun, 26 Sep 2004 13:38:47 -0300

from localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]

----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----

<webmaster[at]siegfried-heinz.org>

(reason: 550 5.7.1 Mail from h64-5-252-134.gtcust.grouptelecom.net (64.5.252.134) refused (blackholed

by bl.spamcop.net); Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?64.5.252.134)

----- Transcript of session follows -----

451 aim-high.net: Name server timeout

451 ebook-club.net: Name server timeout

451 heavenlyhardcore.net: Name server timeout

451 livecamsoftware.net: Name server timeout

451 vlga.net: Name server timeout

... while talking to doctor.vip.net.:

>>> RCPT To:<energize[at]vip.net>

<<< 451 Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?64.5.252.134

<energize[at]vip.net>... Deferred: 451 Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?64.5.252.134

... while talking to email.04desember.com.:

>>> DATA

<<< 550 5.7.1 Mail from h64-5-252-134.gtcust.grouptelecom.net (64.5.252.134) refused (blackholed by

bl.spamcop.net); Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?64.5.252.134

550 5.1.1 <webmaster[at]siegfried-heinz.org>... User unknown

<<< 503 5.5.1 Need RCPT before DATA

... while talking to mail.ltex.net.:

>>> RCPT To:<cheifb[at]ltex.net>

<<< 451 Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?64.5.252.134

<cheifb[at]ltex.net>... Deferred: 451 Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?64.5.252.134

<links[at]worldcc.net>... Deferred: Connection timed out with mail.worldcc.net.

... while talking to mailhub.siol.net.:

>>> QUIT

<<< 421 Service not available

<dmaster[at]siol.net>... Deferred: 421 Service not available

... while talking to mailhub1.myecom.net.:

>>> RCPT To:<orlafla[at]myecom.net>

<<< 451 Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?64.5.252.134

<orlafla[at]myecom.net>... Deferred: 451 Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?64.5.252.134

<jnaneshwar7[at]netpen.net>... Deferred: Connection refused by netpen.net.

... while talking to spamlite.knology.net.:

>>> RCPT To:<kofnye[at]knology.net>

<<< 451 Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?64.5.252.134

<kofnye[at]knology.net>... Deferred: 451 Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?64.5.252.134

... while talking to surfbest.net.mail9.psmtp.com.:

>>> RCPT To:<bulldog[at]surfbest.net>

<<< 452 Message would exceed quota for <bulldog[at]surfbest.net>

<bulldog[at]surfbest.net>... Deferred: 452 Message would exceed quota for <bulldog[at]surfbest.net>

... while talking to surfbest.net.mail11.psmtp.com.:

>>> RCPT To:<bulldog[at]surfbest.net>

<<< 452 Message would exceed quota for <bulldog[at]surfbest.net>

<bulldog[at]surfbest.net>... Deferred: 452 Message would exceed quota for <bulldog[at]surfbest.net>

... while talking to surfbest.net.mail12.psmtp.com.:

>>> RCPT To:<bulldog[at]surfbest.net>

<<< 452 Message would exceed quota for <bulldog[at]surfbest.net>

<bulldog[at]surfbest.net>... Deferred: 452 Message would exceed quota for <bulldog[at]surfbest.net>

<admin[at]xxx-moviesworld.net>... Deferred: Connection refused by xxx-moviesworld.net.

Warning: message still undelivered after 4 hours

Will keep trying until message is 5 days old

[ Part 2.2: "Delivery Status" ]

Reporting-MTA: dns; websites.knotwork.com

Arrival-Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 13:38:47 -0300

Final-Recipient: RFC822; webmaster[at]siegfried-heinz.org

Action: failed

Status: 5.7.1

Remote-MTA: DNS; email.04desember.com

Diagnostic-Code: SMTP;

550 5.7.1 Mail from h64-5-252-134.gtcust.grouptelecom.net

(64.5.252.134) refused (blackholed by bl.spamcop.net);

Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?64.5.252.134

Last-Attempt-Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 11:53:03 -0300

So, what the heck is all that RCPT stuff about? Has a spammer attacked me by placing into my mailing-list an address that has hen been turned into an attack on a sequence of other alternate systems?

I only recently poured all my users into the mailman system, I did so precisely to have some way of monitoring bounces, because originally the scripts that everyone signed up at had no verification at all, anyone could plug in any email address they wanted to, whether it existed or not. They all have always had a delete option in the scri_pt to delete their membership. Strangely though, the spamcop recrods show well over a year of not much fuss, then recently - since using mailman to send out the mail - enough of something is going on to have caused me to get blacklisted.

Is there a way to find out exactly what the events were that caused the blacklisting? Because any time that any user chooses to tell any of the membership scripts on my webserver a bad address they could start to trigger such an event, IF the bad addresses (the salted ones for example that some things I have seen on spamcops website make mention of) simply register a complaint with spamcop instead of first attempting to delete their membership / unsubscribe.

Are persons who deliberately input incorrect addresses liable for the expenses that they thus cause? The scripts I am using are not earning enopugh money to pay for newer advanced scripts that would include some kind of validation. If persons lying about their email address are thought to be a legitimate cause for upgrading the scripts, are the expenses of such upgrades legitimately able to be billed to the offenders?

I need to know, when a complaint happens, what the complaining address is, in order to remove that address and the entire member that input that address. Also, possibly, to warn other webmasters against the offender. If I am informed of the complaint swiftly enough I could retain my web logs longer than just the one day between stats-generating, and use the web-logs to find the IP address of the person who input the offending address.

How can I go about tracking down the offenses???

Also, how come I have not been informed of the complaints? What email address, unknown to spammers so that I can actually read it, would notifications of such things be sent to?

-MarkM- Proprietor, Digitalis Data Services 9Established 1980). Owner/Admin of knotwork.com.

[Derek T]

Hi, I came here due to a multiple-bounced email address that Fedora Core 2's "mailman" system reported to me as having bounced enough times to have caused the subscription to be suspended.

Looking at mailman's report of the offending bounce, I found:

I only recently poured all my users into the mailman system, I did so precisely to have some way of monitoring bounces, because originally the scripts that everyone signed up at had no verification at all, anyone could plug in any email address they wanted to, whether it existed or not. They all have always had a delete option in the scri_pt to delete their membership. Strangely though, the spamcop recrods show well over a year of not much fuss, then recently - since using mailman to send out the mail - enough of something is going on to have caused me to get blacklisted.

Is there a way to find out exactly what the events were that caused the blacklisting? Because any time that any user chooses to tell any of the membership scripts on my webserver a bad address they could start to trigger such an event, IF the bad addresses (the salted ones for example that some things I have seen on spamcops website make mention of) simply register a complaint with spamcop instead of first attempting to delete their membership / unsubscribe.

Are persons who deliberately input incorrect addresses liable for the expenses that they thus cause? The scripts I am using are not earning enopugh money to pay for newer advanced scripts that would include some kind of validation. If persons lying about their email address are thought to be a legitimate cause for upgrading the scripts, are the expenses of such upgrades legitimately able to be billed to the offenders?

I need to know, when a complaint happens, what the complaining address is, in order to remove that address and the entire member that input that address. Also, possibly, to warn other webmasters against the offender. If I am informed of the complaint swiftly enough I could retain my web logs longer than just the one day between stats-generating, and use the web-logs to find the IP address of the person who input the offending address.

How can I go about tracking down the offenses???

Also, how come I have not been informed of the complaints? What email address, unknown to spammers so that I can actually read it, would notifications of such things be sent to?

-MarkM- Proprietor, Digitalis Data Services 9Established 1980). Owner/Admin of knotwork.com.

17903[/snapback]

Have you even tried following the link provided? Your 'mailings' are obviously going to people who didn't ask for them and have reported them as spam

<quote>

Query bl.spamcop.net - 64.5.252.134

(Help) (Trace IP) (Senderbase lookup)

64.5.252.134 listed in bl.spamcop.net (127.0.0.2)

Causes of listing

SpamCop users have reported system as a source of spam less than 10 times in the past week

Additional potential problems

(these factors do not directly result in spamcop listing)

Listing History

In the past 491.1 days, it has been listed 5 times for a total of 4.8 days

</quote>

Did you bother to read the FAQ's here?

Your description of 'pouring a mailing list' which is not confirmed opt-in horrifies me. You deserve to be blocked IMHO see the FAQ:

Am I running mailing lists responsibly? at

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=779

No-one should be expected to unsubscribe from something they never subscribed to, indeed it's a very stupid thing to do as it confirms their address as valid to your fellow-spammers.

[knotwork]

Yes I followed the link. It looked at first blush as if it might be saying that actual humans had complained. But reading the SpamCop site further seemed to indicate that that might not necessarily be the case. It seemed possible that the so called complainsts might be automated complains from "spam trap addresses". Because I know for a fact that there is a spammer on the list. Every time I mail to the list, shortly after the mail starts going out I get a couple of spoofs trying to spoof being my sender-address, trying to get the list to send out a virus or trojan or something, some kind of .exe type of garbage presuambly intended for DOS or Wndows types of systems.

So I figured maybe this spammer, whom I know exists, might know of some of SpamCop's "spamtrap" addresses and have created some accounts using those addresses. Thereby automatically generatng complaints.

I now wish I hadn't just deleted thos spoof attempts. I get so many spams and attachments in the run of a day that I didn't anticipate ever having time to follow up to try to track down he spammer. I will have to look in my mail folders though just in case I did save a copy, and if they aren't reading this and aren't a member of a private forum where I have also mentioned this, maybe they will try it again and i will start tracking them down.

The people in my list have been members of one or more membership-sites for, in some cases, years. Opt-in on the email address given by a member joining a website was a very new innovation, or maybe not even yet starting to come into vogue, way back then. It is precisely becauise i know that a huge number of the addresses are no longer valid that I have poured them all into mailman to process the bounces. The prolbem is going to be whether it is right and correct to threaten people with loss of service as punichment for not having a valid email address on file. That is, should I merely remove the dead addresses from my members records or should I remove the members themselves from the sites they are members of? I have not yet definitively decided whether or not web-people ought to die when the corresponding email-person dies. After all, just because they do not have an email address need not mean they do not have a browser. So I am going slow on this. I do not want to penalise persons who are on sabbatical for a few years with thier mailbox full or dead just because some jerk of a spammer is trying to jerk people around. Everyone deserves every opportunity to retain the service they, or someone pretending to have rights to their email address, signed up for.

Part of the objective in moving them all into mailman is to eventually be able to do a second opt-in. But, first, I need to make sure that everyone is in fact beng reached, so that legitimate members do not miss their opportunity to confirm their membership. I need to somehow separate people into different categories of failure. So that a mere full mailbox can mean keep trying whereas a no longer at that address can mean check with their sponsor (recruiter) and their downliners (recruits) to see if anyone knows where they moved to, what their new address is, and can contact them to remind them that they forgot to tell us of their change of address and also forgot to unsubscribe.

It is a big hairy mess, but, double opt-in will not fix it. because, the spammer can easily tell me an adress that the spammer can confirm from, then set that address to forward the mail. (Is that what those RCPT things are in the ofending mail I posted at start of this thread? That member is causing my mailserver to go attack a sequence of other systems?)

There might be as few as one bad address, or as many as the number of reports SpamCop claims to have received. Which is only aobut ten or so. Once I clean those few out, I can use a regimen of double opt in for any new subscribers, manually, as I manually paste new members of all of the membership-sites into mailman using an invitation-mode import. Then also manually somehow do something, not sure what, about the actual memberships of the folks who sign up with a typo in their email address or lying about their email address.

I also need to start sorting which members are active, since if they log into the website I can demand their correct email address, and if they send traffic to the site (trying to recruit a downline) I can track down where the traffic is coming from and try to get hold of them via the source of the traffic that they are sending.

So yeah I know that good old folks who have been customers or whoever for years and years are nowadays being victimised by the whole spam thing, and I am trying to do something about it, but NOT by turning a spam attack into a denial of service attack against my members!!! Which is what you seem to advocate I ought to do. (Deny my members a service they have had for years, on account of this newfangled problem known as spammers.)

-MarkM- proprietor, Digitalis Data Services (Established 1980). Owner/Operator of knotwork.com.

[dra007]

Well, spammer spoil it for everybody. Here is the STORY of a spammer in your neighbourhood, in Ontario.

[Wazoo]

So much rambling going on here .. one of your questions is answered as;

Parsing input: 64.5.252.134

host 64.5.252.134 = h64-5-252-134.gtcust.grouptelecom.net (cached)

Reporting addresses:

abuse[at]gt.ca

what the heck is all that RCPT stuff about?

Without seeing the original e-mail, not knowing what / how you have your configurations set, etc ... the only thing guessed at from this end is that there was a huge list of CC: or BCC: addresses that rejected this incoming e-mail. I don't know of any other definition of "RCPT stuff"

Your original description of dumping in a bunch of e-mail addresses and later attempts to justify this list creation and why you don't think you should be bothered about verifying any of them prior to this ... talking about making decision on whther an e-mail box is full, dead, or had been picked up by a different user along the way but then asking "what the heck is all that RCPT stuff" .... sure sounds like there's something wrong in your plan and its implementation .. but again, so much rambling going on, maybe I haven't quite got the story straight ..???

[knotwork]

It wasn't a list creation just a list consolidation onto a more suitable software system. A whole bunch of silly little old-tech membershi-sites each had its own little list, and continuing to clone the scri_pt to make more little membership sites with different themes of focus led to seeing that it was not going to be practical to keep on manually doing the mailing for each site and have to paste from the "dump email addresses" web-page to a text file to run a for-loop shell-command mailout on.

So instead of making one little mailman list per site I made one mailman list containing all the sites lists, and sent out a mail saying this is going to all the members of all the sites and includes a way to unsubscribe from mailman plus if you want you also can delete your actual memberships in whichever of the sites you are a member of.

So its not a new list at all really, it is a potentially better software to handle all the same users that previously had never had any of their bounces processed and who would previosly have had to delete their actual membership - or change their member record to a null or invalid email address - to opt out.

I don't think the membership sites even force people to have an email address at all. I think folks can edit their membership record leaving the email address field empty. They might even be able to leave it empty when they originally sign up.

But a lot of domains have expired over the years plus a lot of folk have changed their email address without bothering to log in at the sites they are membvers of to update (or eliminate completely) their email address. So the move to mailman is intended to allow cleaning up all those problems. With mailman I should find out which addreses don't work and those ones will get suspended. That part worked fine, i just did not expect that the reason for the email addresses not working would be that my mailserver is blacklisted. That results in false data. If I suspend subscriptions due to my server being blacklisted instead of due to the person's email address genuinely no longer being a good address, that voids the whole purpose and requires re-checking all those addresses again from a server that is not blacklisted.

I can maybe try some other filters too, like checking for accounts that are "inactive" in some sense as in they do not send traffic anymore have not filled in any of the fields used in actually using the site and stuff like that. But these are recruiters, to them stealing their recruits is a major no-no, so certainly any accounts that do have "downlines" there is a whole ethical question of is it OK to delete them thereby in effect stealing their downline and giving it to their upline.

They are "marketers", which, contrary to how you and I might view marketing, do not consider marketing and spamming to be at all the same or maybe even at all related. i mean these people make deliberate spamfest lists they refer to as "safelists" deliberately so as to spam each other. It is a weird weird world they come from. They want to spam, spamming is what they do, they are basically "legal spammers". They voluntarily accept spam in order to have the right to send spam. It is spammers spamming spammers. The problem seems to be that some one, probably the person who keeps trying to spoof the sender address to send some kind of executable (to some operating-systems: .exe) attatchment out to everyone, has somehow insinuated either a spamtrap address or an innocent victim (a non-marketer, or one of those "I am not a spammer my spam is actually legitimate" types.)

Because the original scripts date back so far and had no bounce-checking at all, no feedback from mailouts back to the database of users, it is actually conceivable that for years a bad address was in one of the membership sites and that site just happened to be one that very very seldom ever had a mail-out done for it at all. I have often gone months or a year or more between sending a mailing to the members. We are only talking about a grand total of less than 1800 addresses. I have not sent enough mailouts using mailman yet to have discovered what percent of the addresses have gone dead over the years. A lot of the users I know from various forums and other programs, so quite a few of them I will be able to ocntact by other means if I do discover that their email address is out of date. In fact at least one of them I know full well that his email address is out of date and just haven't yet pestered him as to whether he ever plans to update it or if not to please just leave that field blank in case someone buys the domain that he no longer is using.

Theoretically these people all know some of each other, as the sites all tell you that when you get a sginup you should write to them and greet them and welcome them and check if they need any help and so on. "Network Marketing". Like Silke Stahl says, "In Network Marketing the Networking always comes before the Marketing". So all these folk should have been getting meails all this time anyway from who-ever actually sent them to the site to sign up at it. When I find out which have bad email addresses I can contact their recruiter and their recruits to ask if anyone knows what happened to them, are they still alive, did they switch career, are they on sabbatical, are tey just too broke to afford email for a few motnhs or what? The head of one of the forums I frequent lost internet access for many months. Didn't mean we should assume she wasn't interested, or that we should wipe her from our sites or plans. People do lose access, sometimes for months. They are usually glad to still be known and remembered when they finally manage to return. They have spent years building these contacts. It is their contacts-lists that I am storing for them in effect. But they have not been maintaining them properly so now I have to step in and try to clean them up because they haven't been cleaning up themselves. I do not even know yet which of them have been mailing each other like the instructions tell them to and which never even noticed that they had recruited someone who did not have a valid email address, or that someone they had recrutied had since changed their email address without updating the system with their new address.

I have seen both sides of the whole "searching versus spamming" problem, the whole should you be aloof and make the customers search for you or be pushy and shove yourself in the face of potential customers. Advertising versus keeping trade secrets or trying to fly under radar or trying to avoid being found. It is not just spammers who have spoiled things, it is also the "legal spammers" ("marketers" as they often prefer to be called, or "advertisers") who have done so. The "commercialisation", the "commercials". That whole "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" philosophy of they who shout loudest should get richer faster than those who quietly wait and maybe even give up jobs to allow those who demand jobs to have them instead, hoping that eventually all the shouting will quiet down and the hungry will be fed the homeless clothed and so on - which the shouters mostly seem determined to prevent, hogging all the resources to themselves.

-MarkM-

[dra007]

What you are describing so eloquently and lengthly could have been summarized in one word, ok, two: pyramid scheme!

[Merlyn]

Those are human complaints on the Spamcop evidence page. You must realize for every 1 complaint at Spamcop tens of thousands go unreported.

If you are not spamming your IP will be delisted up to 48 hours from the last spam report.

Great page you have here:

http://makemoney.knotwork.com/

[DavidT]

Exactly. MLM is basically slimy.

Here's the deal....people are reporting your broadcasts as spam, so you've got to clean up your lists.

DT

[dra007]

/snip

Great page you have here:

http://makemoney.knotwork.com/

17915[/snapback]

Interesting, it confirms my previous post!

[Derek T]

Interesting, it confirms my previous post!

17917[/snapback]

ISTM that Sharp's corollary to rule 1 and Crissman's corollary to rule 2 both apply here.

[knotwork]

Yes I agree that the whole area is suspicious. Basically in the course of my researches into such things as what is maturity, what is an adult, does biological maturity equate to any other kind of maturity and so on I realsed that money is one of the topics that are "adult topics". I narrowed the list down to Drugs, Gambling, Money, Politics, Religion, Sex and Violence. Money appears to be one of the most dangerous of drugs and is heavily implicated in Gambling, Politics, and Violence.

Because I found myself constantly under siege by money addicts, such as landlords and ration-dispensers (ration-withholders might be a more apt term) I found it necessary to investigate the topic "money". The GNU "Make Money" project is an investigation into the possibility of carrying out the programme proposed by R. Buckminster Fuller in his book "Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth", That is, basically, to compute the amounts of food clothing shelter and other wealth (forward person-days of life-support on Spaceship Earth) instead of letting life-support fall into the contrl of druglords, including psychological drugs such as money and politics and religion.

So yeah, I know that conflict and controversy all seems to focus into those areas - Drug, Gambling, Money, Politics, Religion, Sex and Violence. I also know that the problem of search versus spam, also known as privacy versus publicity, is partly a political problem and partly a money problem. I am right there in the thick of it in order to attempt to "divine" the actual nature of so-called "marketers", which I am not convinced is truly "human nature". I suspect that it is, rather, "animal nature" and that, potentially at least, "human nature" is maybe more along the lines of "adapt to human culture". So the old nature versus nurture problem is also implicated.

I suspect that ultimately the term ad ult might boil down to advertising and ultimatums, that anything which derives from this one central nexus of controversy/conflict all ends up getting regarded as "adult" and that most "adults" try to hide their heads in sand, blinker themselves, hide from the central problem area by pretending that one or another of the main "adult" categories are OK and the problem lies in one of the other such categories.

I am trying to clean up the lists. I will continue to try to clean up the lists. I am also trying to clarify the categorisation. One thing I have learned so far is that the "pyramid scheme" type of structure does seem to work nicely for things that are free, or that are at least, not directly explicitly "money". Notiice though that there is a pyramid on (some) U.S. money in addition to their answering the "render unto Caesar" argument my explicitly putting that Trust in God blurb on the money. Who should we render it unto, the one who is named or the one that is pictured? Image, appearance, what was meant, the graphic meaning (graphic = relating to words or writing) or the appearance/picture? The social security system in virtually all nations is a ponzi. If ponzis do not work, why use them for Social Security?

The central nexus of problems is quite a knotty overlap of venn-diagrams / categories. It is a very interesting study. I am glad that SpamCop exists and is doing some part in penetrating that murky nexus. Like the Beatles sang, "We're all doing what we can." Oh but wait, who is 'we"? Seems what some folk can do isn't appreaciated by some other folk. Just because something can be done need it therefore be done?

-MarkM-

--

We are known by the company we keep.

Is it a cult? Check point by point using The Advanced Bonewits’ Cult Danger Evaluation Frame (ABCDEF)

[Wazoo]

Sorry, this was started within the Help Forum, which is defined as "Help with the SpamCop Reporting System" ... I'd already mentioned the "way too much rambling" .. this last post takes that way over the top .. Topic moved to Lounge ... Personal opinion, misuse of the GNU description, and Bucky's Manual is woefully mis-represented ... the rant was just the crowning touch ....

[DavidT]

Like the Beatles sang, "We're all doing what we can." Oh but wait, who is 'we"?

tinw

(sorry, couldn't pass up that opportunity...but I sure can pass up any MLM, MMF, etc.)

DT

[dra007]

There is only one more step from MLM to pegan cult! It's a small step for man, it only stops there!

[knotwork]

Hey thanks for moving the thread Wazoo, very civilised of you. I am way overdue to re-read Bucky's manual, if you could give me some pointers as to what to watch out for in it that'd be great, since I apparently have not yet managed to comprehend it. It is great to find someone who has read it and hopefully is articulate, as most folks seem unable even to read it let alone comprehend it. I would truly appreciate hearing your insights into it.

I was probably being influenced by this bit. which, as the last two paragraphs, gave the impression of being the conclusion:

"You may very appropriately want to ask me how we are going to resolve the ever-acceleratingly dangerous impasse of world-opposed politicians and ideological dogmas. I answer, it will be resolved by the computer. Man has ever-increasing confidence in the computer; witness his unconcerned landings as airtransport passengers coming in for a landing in the combined invisibility of fog and night. While no politician or political system can ever afford to yield understandably and enthusiastically to their adversaries and opposers, all politicians can and will yield enthusiastically to the computers safe flight-controlling capabilities in bringing all of humanity in for a happy landing.

"So, planners, architects, and engineers take the initiative. Go to work, and above all co-operate and don’t hold back on one another or try to gain at the expense of another. Any success in such lopsidedness will be increasingly short-lived. These are the synergetic rules that evolution is employing and trying to make clear to us. They are not man-made laws. They are the infinitely accommodative laws of the intellectual integrity governing universe."

-MarkM-

--

R.T.F.M.

[Wazoo]

Take what you posted as the conclusion back to much earlier in the book. What is being reiterated is the same situation as being described when the "Pirates lost control to the Wizards" .... the magic of things not seen having tangible and serious results arising from their manipulations by those that held the secrets ...

[Merlyn]

Yes I agree that the whole area is suspicious. Basically in the course of my researches into such things as what is maturity, what is an adult, does biological maturity equate to any other kind of maturity and so on I realsed that money is one of the topics that are "adult topics"..................

{Lots more snipped.......}

17941[/snapback]

Under Rule #1:

Lexical Contradiction: Spammers will redefine any term in order to disguise their abuse of Internet resources.

[knotwork]

Thanks. Both of you. I'll need time meditation and contemplation - also probably re-reading - before getting back to you on those points.

Now as to the misuse of the GNU label? I changed the site to read notes toward a GNU "make money" rather than labelling the site as GNU precisely because I have been "forced" (read: I somehow imagined it expedient at some point) to resort to some components for which I have not yet been able to purchase, on behalf of GNU as it were, sufficient rights to rebrand them as GNU...

-MarkM-

[Merlyn]

What site exactly was that?

I did not see it at http://adult.knotwork.com/ all I saw was Click Here For Adult Knotwork Viral Traffic Generator!

[Wazoo]

What site exactly was that?

I did not see it at http://adult.knotwork.com/ all I saw was Click Here For Adult Knotwork Viral Traffic Generator!

My complaint about the GNU designation was at http://makemoney.knotwork.com/ .. Google lists quite a number of other sites, not going to bother to see if they are all hosted / admin'd by the same individual .. noting that your site isn't in that list <g>

[knotwork]

Oh well excuse me for not having spammed the search-engines sufficiently to get my sites listed at the top of the google listings, I'll have to tell my server to devote more processing-power and disk-space to spiderfood pages.

Thanks for the links though, if you have good Page Rank here maybe they'll help!.

I guess its only common decency to give you some recips, sheesh I wonder if you're already listed yet on ISP Knotwork's spam page?

...Yep, sure are, probably have been for years.

-MarkM-