Wazoo Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Way back in the good old days (?) .. it was easy to recognise the "Bulk" thing as you'd see 100 addresses included in the To: line. These days, you are obviously dealing with an idiot (or a "friend (?)) if you see this kind of a clue. As far as I'm concerned, the general run-of-the-mill spam, be it a porn link, a fantastically cheap deal on software or the preverbial genuine replica Rolex watch, or the favorite drug of the week ... it's pretty obvious that the spammer isn't going to retire on what "you" are going to send him/her .. so it's not hard to make the assumption that at least two other people in the world rceived a copy of it also .. so now define the word "Bulk" .... actually easier to do at the ISP level, at both the receiving and sending end. Other spams may be a bit harder to recognise on your own, but .... I rarely see any spam that has me hesitating <g> You use a "Bb" in your post .. perhaps a language / font thing? In general, in English, I think what you are talking about is called BCC: - Blind Courtesy Copy .... but yes, these are the ones that (if everything is working OK) leaves you wondering how it arrived in your InBox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim P Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 <snip> You use a "Bb" in your post .. perhaps a language / font thing? In general, in English, I think what you are talking about is called BCC: - Blind Courtesy Copy .... but yes, these are the ones that (if everything is working OK) leaves you wondering how it arrived in your InBox. 22781[/snapback] Yes, quite right. I meant Bcc: Just didn't re-edit the post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted March 18, 2005 Share Posted March 18, 2005 Actually they were exactly in the same line of work and it was as simple as a legitimate business offering business to business treated as if it were the colorful reference you indicated. Therein lies the arrogance and ignorance of many reports and supports, and the entire reason for this initial post way at the top. Your reference to the ISP is perfect, and exactly what bothers me the most, because this is exactly how more than one are acting today as a result of " the witch hunt " .... No details missing in this case, it was exactly as described and all within ONE HOUR of the proprietors unwarranted actions - seriously. Witch Hunt is the key phrase and when anyone has a torch watch out, this isn't going to end in catching legitimate spam scum, especially when the referee's take no time to consider anything. ( Including the law or common sense apparently. ) 22141[/snapback] ...What you describe does not sound to me like a "witch hunt;" rather, it sounds like an overzealous service provider doing the "victim" customer a favor by forcing her/him to take business to a more reasonable provider.... <g> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff G. Posted March 18, 2005 Share Posted March 18, 2005 Of course, the overzealous ISP was never identified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.