Jeff Williams
Sat, 16 Oct 1999 22:59:31 -0700
Joe and all, J. Baptista wrote: > On Sat, 16 Oct 1999, Jeff Williams wrote: > > > > I understand completely. The Bob Shaw incident is now swallowing up a few > > > antispammers with it. > > > > LOL! I am sure it is! Bob is rather disgusting individual. > > Are you kidding? Your being too kind. I was on the horn with our > industry people and while we were talking a little bird wispered to me on > the subject of bob shaw, sola and the industry canada reps. Shaw was > plugged, he was rude, he was crude, he was lude. The man is a drunk. He > grossed them out in Berlin. I'm bring this conduct to the attention of > his boss when I get around to the next stage in Mr. shaws continued > education with PCCF. Well I was trying to be diplomatic. Yes, I have heard from at least three different individuals that old Bob Shaw has a drinking problem and bums cigarettes (Virginia slims?), as well. I have also heard he has so gestapo tendencies if you know what I mean. Maybe this is why Joe Simms did some backpedalling on Bob Shaw getting on the GAC. Than disappeared without further comment. Remember? I do. And documented it as well. And yes, I have my spies even in the ITU! >;) > > > I'm astounded that the ITU would appoint such a joke to such an important > position. We all shaw the articles that the ITU wants a hand in internet > governance. Well .. if Mr Shaw is an example of the ITU confidence in the > process, then I think it's time to start converting them over to the PTT > Museam. Good god, shaw was their lan administrator, how in the hell does > an ignorent techi end up in such a post making internation policy. Well I heard that he wasn't a very good lan administrator. Maybe it is an egregious example of the Peter Principal? > > > The ITU need to upgrade it's image - badly. Have a drink Bob - 1999 was a > long year - and 2000 is going to be a bummer. > > Regards > Joe baptista > > > > > > > > > > > > By the way. Since I'm think of Bob, I've just completed a new list of > > > Media fax numbers - pruned for net use, which I shall be making available > > > soon. > > > > Well make sure I get a copy there joe old buddy! >;) > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > Joe Baptista > > > > > > > > > > > J. Baptista wrote: > > > > > > > > > You don't get it do you. People are signing up for free internet services > > > > > to which thery agree to receive email adverts - or stuff like that. There > > > > > is an increasing need to have a commercial email top level domain. Thos > > > > > who subscribe to free services agree to get adverts - those that do not > > > > > can block at the smtp mta by means of tld. > > > > > > > > > > With respect to porn, it's much harder to block new domains in anti porn > > > > > filters like i-l-o-v-e-h-e-r-t-w-a-t.com, but very easy to block an entire > > > > > dot.sex tld. You get my drift. It makes legislatures jobs much easier. > > > > > > > > > > Right now the anti-spam nuts are trying to get mta's reprogrammed for some > > > > > type of banner exchange. Crazy stuff. But it's much easier to block at > > > > > the dns level, the mta will just send an error message. See what I mean, > > > > > the tools exists to provide the net with answers to existing communication > > > > > problem. > > > > > > > > > > It would also serve the pro spammers - or as they would like to call > > > > > themselves - pro commercial emailers. At this time most of their > > > > > marketing techniques seem to be restricted to some monster called ffa > > > > > blaster. If your really interested in knowing more about it, just do a > > > > > search engin look up. > > > > > > > > > > This FFA blaster apparrently generates nightly over 300,000 email > > > > > exchanges. That's per blaster. In some cases these blasters (what they > > > > > call safe posting lists) have generated enought email to drown large > > > > > isp's. Recently Ottawa's istar.ca had major smtp problems for this very > > > > > reason. > > > > > > > > > > Of course these people like the anti-spam people are also nuts. Some > > > > > actually read the thousands of email communications they receive per day. > > > > > Other use extensive filtering devices and never actually read all this > > > > > email, but do autorespond to it. > > > > > > > > > > I'm getting really concerned that the future of electronic marketing is > > > > > being restricted to mass mail programs generated by robots, replied to by > > > > > robots, filed and deleted by robots, with minimal human intervention. > > > > > > > > > > So you can see what I'm getting at - both groups are kooks. > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > Joe Baptista > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 16 Oct 1999, Peter Veeck wrote: > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > -- > > Jeffrey A. Williams > > Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!) > > CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. > > Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. > > E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Contact Number: 972-447-1894 > > Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208 > > > > > > Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!) CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact Number: 972-447-1894 Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208