Spammer Rules

[Merlyn]

The Rules Of spam

Rule #0: spam is theft. :angry:

• Angel's Commentary: Spammers believe it's okay to steal a little bit from each person on the Internet at once.
  

Rule #1: Spammers lie.

• Russel's Admonition: Always assume that there is a measurable chance that the entity you are dealing with is a spammer.
  

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

• Sharp's Corollary: Spammers attempt to re-define "spamming" as that which they do not do.
  

• Finnell's Corollary: Spammers define "remove" as "validate."
  

Rule #2: If a spammer seems to be telling the truth, see Rule #1.

• Crissman's Corollary: A spammer, when caught, blames his victims.
  

• Moore's Corollary: Spammer's lies are seldom questioned by mainstream media.
  

Rule #3: Spammers are stupid.

• Krueger's Corollary: Spammer lies are really stupid.
  

• Pickett's Commentary: Spammer lies are boring.
  

• Russell's Corollary: Never underestimate the stupidity of spammers.
  

• Spinosa's Corollary: Spammers assume everybody is more stupid than themselves.
  

• Spammer's Standard of Discourse: Threats and intimidation trump facts and logic.
  

• James' Axioms of Spammers' Beliefs:
  • Bandwidth is infinite. It possible for infinite messages to occupy the same box at the same time.
    
  • The less value a message has, the more people want to see it.
    
  • The more someone is offended, the more likely they are to buy.
    
  • Reward is inversely proportional to the work done to earn it.
    

Rule #4: The natural course of a spamming business is to go bankrupt.

• Rules-Keeper Shaffer's Refrain: Spammers routinely prove the Rules of spam are valid.
  

Edited August 27, 2004 by Merlyn

[turetzsr]

...Yes, I vote heartily to pin this!

[Wazoo]

Can't argue the logic <g> .. just wish there was a better way to handle this .. already looking for the complaints of the "way too many Pinned" items to come up again. And just to refresh some memories, JT is the only one with the powers to make additional Sections ... and this would be one of the items that should end up in whatever the FAQ thing that has been "being worked on" for quite a while ends up to be. That said, consider it Pinned <g>

and now "Moved" to the Lounge ... reference the many "too many Pinned Topics in Help" and this isn't a "direct" Help thing ....

[IanDavid]

New rule:

Spammers will object when you do the same things to them that they do to you-- including, but not limited to, having to receive email they do not want.

[turetzsr]

New rule:

Spammers will object when you do the same things to them that they do to you-- including, but not limited to, having to receive email they do not want.

...IMHO, that's not really a new rule but rather a restatement of Sharp's Corollary to Rule #1. <g>

[dra007]

Good Job!

[jtevans]

Rule #3: Spammers are stupid. 

Spammers believe that every internet user is a 20-something, over-sexed, physically-under-developed, male who is happy to pump themselves full of dodgy drugs, wants a nice imitation watch, needs a "job" in "financial services" with a new logo, a web-site designed in Russia, and will send a few thousand dollars to a African who has millions just waiting to be released by the local dictator, if only he had some working capital.

Edited April 5, 2006 by jtevans

[lisati]

Spammers believe that every internet user is a 20-something, over-sexed, physically-under-developed, male who is happy to pump themselves full of dodgy drugs, wants a nice imitation watch, needs a "job" in "financial services" with a new logo, a web-site designed in Russia, and will send a few thousand dollars to a African who has millions just waiting to be released by the local dictator, if only he had some working capital.

And they are confident that you will be surprised to learn the truth about your fund, which is being held by an employee of the FBI/Fedex/UPS who happens to use a free email account in preference to one authorized by the organization they work for.

[salamandir]

[*]Pickett's Commentary: Spammer lies are boring.

[*] Salamandir's Rant: If I didn't want to hear about it from the spammer, regardless of how amusing, profound, ironic, or whatever you find it, what makes you think I want to hear about it in regular email, on your blog, or verbally? In other words, if your statement starts with the words "I got this really amusing spam message…" I would rather not hear it at all, thank you.

[turetzsr]

Hi, Salamandir,

...Not just your rant. But, sure, we can name it after you. <big g>

[doxer]

I can't decide if it's a new rule, or a corollary to Rule #3, but I'd like to suggest the following:

Spammers follow the rule that "If it doesn't work, do it more"

If sending 100 messages didn't sell any pills, send 100,000. If a botnet of 1000 machines failed to relay mail through someone's server successfully, deploy one with 10,000. And so on.

Some of this is related to the economics of spam: when you're dealing with success rates that are tiny fractions of a percent, increasing the volume is the only way to break even. But some of it just looks like idiocy.

[ninth]

Spambuster - a person who doesn't like spamw@nkers. The Spambuster will go out of his (or her) way to retaliate against the said spamw@nker so they either leave the group or see the error of their way and stop spamming. Spambusters normally hunt in packs of 4 or more and target the Spamw@nker all at once.

Spamw@nker - a person who constantly spams...

Urban dictionary

Edited May 30, 2023 by ninth
sp