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
