No. Why don't you check with them and let us all know??
Bill
On Tue, 30 Apr 1996, Lawrence S Rosenberg, Esq. wrote:
> At 03:41 AM 5/1/96 +0000, Jonathon Blake wrote:
> >
> >
> >On Tue, 30 Apr 1996, Kynn Bartlett wrote:
> >
> >> This is a really bad idea. Why? Because I've found that AOL, in particular,
> >> are _very_ good about yanking accounts immediately. The AOL admins who
> >
> > My milage varies considerably.
> >
> >> What more could you possibly want them to do? Have you ever dealt with
> >> abuse@aol.com? I get the feeling that you probably have not.
> >
> > When I've sent complaints to abuse@aol.com, it is has bounced
> > back to me as
> > #1: user unknown
> > #2: I'm not a subscriber to the mailing list / abuse
> > #3: mailbox full
> >
> >
> > So i send complaints to all of the following at aol.
> > root
> > postmaster
> > toslnet1
> > toslnet2
> > support
> > the spammer
> >
> > Generally speaking, that seems to have the desired effect.
> > The spammer loses his account.
> >
> > xan
> >
> > jonathon
> > grafolog@netcom.com
>
> One More -
> Since the latest spams are all about *this* "company," has anyone
> inquired of the U.S. Postal Service as to whether this can be handled as a
> misuse of a post office box?
>
>
> Magazine Club Inquiry Center
> Att. FREE Catalogue-by-email Dept.
> PO Box 990
> Staten Island NY 10312-0990
>
> This is where the fax-impaired are supposed to send the form in the
> spam via U.S. Postal Mail. We have all kinds of rules on Postal Mail, and
> I'm not looking for any more rules on the Internet, but ... perhaps this can
> be brought to the attention of the snail mail authorities. IMO, this *is*
> misuse of a post office box ... taxpayer's money and all that, and I don't
> for one minute think that this company is some innocent being caught up in
> this spam. I think a fish stinks from the head down and I think this
> company is paying for professional spamming, which, right now, just happens
> to be easiest to accomplish from AOL.
>
> I'm in California. I think those of us in or near Staten Island,
> NYC, could get this going with a simple phone call. I would have to
> actually write a postal letter and send it same day air. :-)
>
> Gawd ... has anyone bothered to read this specimen, I mean all of
> it? It's what *I* call obscene, or at least it makes me sick.
>
> Viz.
> ..............................
> "Please do not email me as I am just a happy customer and a *busy* student. I
> don't have time to even complete my thesis in time, let alone run my
> part-time software business! Please fill out the above form and carefully
> follow the intructions above to get it to them via fax or smail."
> ..............................
>
> If you have read it you know it gets even better, but to invoke the
> honor of being a student as a ruse to leave the sending account alone is ...
> well, to me it's below the belt. (Particularly when sending to this busy
> student results in a 550 "User Unknown" error. :-)
>
> So, anyone in the NYC area feel this is worth a local call to the
> U.S. Postal authorities or should us lawyer types start writing letters from
> California? ;)
>
> Onward, I hope everyone is having a good week and I apologize for
> quoting from so much of the spam. I think everyone here probably has it
> memorized by now ... but, just in case anyone joined the party late.
>
> My Very Best,
> Lawrence S Rosenberg, Esq.
> For the Rosenberg Law Offices &
> ValleyLaw - ValleyLaw-Digest
> Queued to send - From Los Angeles, California, USA [PDT]
> April 30, 1996
> 10:02 pm
>
> http://www.valleylaw.com * http://www.primenet.com/~lawrose/
> *********************************************************************
> Lawrence S. Rosenberg <lawrose@valleylaw.com> lawrose@primenet.com
> Attorney At Law |Voice Mail: 818.399.0470
> Los Angeles, California |Tel: 818.989.2434 - 213.873.4044
> *********************************************************************
>
>
References:
|
|
