Spam - Curious

  -pops- 08:42 09 May 03
Locked

Does anyone know, either themselves or can point me to a location to find out if, on replying to spam messages that debts are consolidated, Viagra and Xanax (what's that?) are actually obtained and all my inferior sized parts are improved?

For obvious reasons I don't want to respond to spam myself and I don't expect others to either, it is pure curiosity.

Another point is that with the almost universal condemnation of spam, do the spammers make money from their activities?

Brian

  MIke 08:53 09 May 03

Xanax is an anti-depressant

  -pops- 08:56 09 May 03

Oh. Probably need it after wading through all the reams of spam!

  t.long 09:29 09 May 03

Well I guess spammers must make some money, since it must cost money to get the lists and send out all those emails. I do not imagine they do it simply to be anoying.

  Sketch 23:16 09 May 03

Try out 'Mailwasher v3.0' if you are using OE and are getting hassled. You will be hassled, no more.

And the idea of sending the spammer all their spam back to them is just a 'hoot'.....

:o)

SKETCH

  H-J 00:43 10 May 03

Personally I find the terms spam and junk mail slightly objectional in this context. To anyone who hasnt suffered, or people who are not online, the terms are suggestive of something that is at worse, a bit of a nuisance. In fact most of us know that the problem is a lot bigger than that. I think we need a new name for these people. 'Evil perverted parasite scumbags', while not quite as catchy as 'spammers', still gets my vote as a more accurate description of these low lifes.

Hugh

  -pops- 06:33 10 May 03

Sketch: with all due respect your answer is not relevant to my question. H-J - neither is yours.

I'll close this now.

  GANDALF <|:-)> 11:44 10 May 03

They can be annoying if you let them but spam, pop-ups and Pr0n actually pay much of the costs of the internet. If it were not for these three the costs of using the Net would be prohibitive for many people.

There are various anti-spam progs that are fairly good at stopping spam but I just use the delete button...it really is no more difficult than that.

The amount of spam has increased greatly in the last year which leads me to suspect that the ISPs and Telcos (NTL and Telewest especially) are having a bit of a hard time which their end of year summaries tend to confirm.

However the Net is a free resource that can be used anywhere in the world (well not freely in China, Saudi and Tibet ;-)) etc) and I for one would not like any restrictions put on methods of funding it. If access cost were trebled it would not bother me or many in the UK but there would be millions that could not afford it and it is those people that need support.

Building a wall is difficult, sitting on a comfy chair, hitting delete, is not. ;-)))) It is only advertising after all and sensible people can deal with it or do as I did, reply to a Crucial pop-up 2 years ago....all advertising is not bad. Getting worked up about it is rather OTT as there must be more important things to worry about and deal with in life.

Karma.

G

  GANDALF <|:-)> 11:48 10 May 03

'And the idea of sending the spammer all their spam back to them is just a 'hoot'....Doh, the spam goes back to the servers which you probably use, it does not go back to the spammer. Spammers set up disposable addresses that are used once and even if mail is returned they have mailbots that delete incoming, as the address is only used for out-going. By sending mail back you are creating TWICE as much flow...do the math! Doh! No wonder Internet access is getting difficult. *sigh*

G

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

How to get Windows 10 for free | How to install Windows 10: There is still a way to avoid paying…

1995-2015: How technology has changed the world in 20 years

Alex Chinneck’s giant ice cube Christmas tree at Kings Cross

Apple rumours & predictions 2017: The iPhone 8, new iPads, and everything else you should expect fr7…