> Statistically speaking it's a very accurate generalization and I see
> little reason to ignore such things based on what might be more
> politically correct.
Please show me the IT-industry-wide statistics that show that your
profiled user is the _only_ notable recipient of spam (as this was the
_only_ supposed profile you mentioned).
I'm sure that our male-dominated financial clients that do business in
South and Latin America, for one of many examples, would be delighted
to find that their business connections _never_ use spam-friendly ISPs
to send legitimate mail, including some governments.
And our manufacturing clients, where men overwhelmingly set policy,
would also be happy to find that their inability to give any weight to
basic EHLO and PTR errors because their critical business partners are
rampantly misconfigured would be pleasantly counterbalanced if they
just replaced all of the 40+ female employees drawing in all that
spam.
And--I almost forgot!--the porn floods that testosterone-soaked
trading desks and mailrooms mysteriously receive must be getting
rerouted...better open a support ticket for that one.
> As a result of this women, and especially women over the age of 30
> represent a disporportionally large number of the accounts that
> receive over 100 spams a day.
Is it 30, or is it 40? Is it the age at which ageism is, federally
recognized (the latter), or is that not actually sound? Does your
figure actually hold up after controlling for class, age, race,
gender, industry, job title, personal/business primary use, et al.?
Can you possibly have a valid sample? I doubt it.
> You can classify this in many different ways and get many different
> answers.
You can indeed. Seems you chose the one that was most juicy for a
male-dominated space.
> Let me get this straight, you didn't like my association of a
> particular demographic with spam, but you feel that it is
> appropriate to then classify young men as what created the Internet
> bubble?
No, I specifically said that they "blew hot air into the bubble." To
attempt to say that young entrepreneurs were not the technical "idea
men" behind the bubble is to rewrite history. I was there on the
inside of eight or nine such nightmares and know so intimately.
> ...the young Internet entrepreneurs were just patsies in the game...
ROFLOL. You might have prospered and lived to gloat about it, but you
never worked in a dotcom, clearly (or not in more than one lucky
exception). Hey, yeah, without the VCs and IBs, it couldn't have been
what it was, but if you think that "kewl" and the accompanying
upselling of utter non-implementable nonsense were the work of
patsies, come on. It took two to tango.
Whatever, everyone has their grudges. But targeting a distinctly
disempowered demographic is infinitely more dangerous than laying into
young, educated men. The last thing IT communities need is more
sexism.
--Sandy
------------------------------------
Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist
Broadleaf Systems, a division of
Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc.
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SpamAssassin plugs into Declude!
http://www.mailmage.com/download/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/Release/
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.
