Anti-Spam Site Accused of Spamming, Fixes Error
An anonymous reader writes "According to this article on CNN, banthespam.com is accused of spamming its visitors. Excerpt: Even if an Internet user chose not to receive e-mail updates from the Telecommunications Research and Action Center, one of the effort's sponsors, the Web site replied with the message: 'You are currently signed up for news and information.' This doesn't help guys . . ." As the article states, the problem was quickly caught and corrected -- and banthespam.com looks like another force for good in the world.
It seems that this is much ado about nothing. It seems that it was a case of overzealous cutting and pasting.
According to this response by the alleged spammers:
The TRAC site did indeed for a short period of time state "You are currently signed up for news and information." - but that statement was inaccurate and was just a template response that was generated when a person's story was submitted (standard language from a script that was copied).
Don't ascribe to malice that which can be better explained by incompetance...
Now, I'm just left wondering if it was an honest mistake to spam the visitors, or if someone thought the irony would boost visits...
/. posting some news that really didn't matter, just in an attempt to be funny...
'Cuz that would be like
=D
Karma: \Kar"ma\, n. [Skr.] (Buddhism) One's acts considered as fixing one's lot in the future existence.
...to stop spam is to filter all the email that says "this message was not sent unsolicited."
"Derp de derp."
I can't help but admire the irony of the spam messages I receive offering to "remove pop-ups for ever!!!". I am just waiting for the first spam that offers to "eliminate spam today!!!"
Okay, so the web designer put the wrong message for the 'No mail' option. It was an embarrassment to the site and somewhat funny to the rest of us but not really all that news worthy.
Oh well, at least I went to there site and read an article that did have value. Apparently the Telecommunications Research and Action Center is asking the FTC to rule that unsolicited commercial email is "deceptive and therefore unlawful"
The email would have to meet certain criteria that are similar to the Washington State's anti-spamming law.
Email would be considered illegal if it:
Misrepresents the sender (in source or routing information)
Misrepresents the subject or content of the email
Fails to provide reliable contact information for the real party in interest
Fails to provide a reliable opt-out system
Is sent to an individual who has opted out or resigned from sender's list, or to whom sending unsolicited, commercial email is otherwise prohibited by law.
Laws like this are seen as being a balance between our rights to privacy and a companies rights to communicate. Unfortunately, with any 'opt-out' strategy, the victim is overwhelmed by SPAM because he/she can not opt out as fast as his or her name is sold.
We really need laws that make the selling of email addresses illegal.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Microsoft was found to have several pieces of software (including the ever popular BOB) which had licenses that looked suspiciously like GPL. However, after being called the "prince of open source movement," Company spokesdrones declared that it was in fact a clerical error, and Microsoft has every intention to continue on the path of Evil Empire (tm), and promptly put very restrictive licenses onto the aforementioned software, therefore continuing to be a force of evil in the world.
My life in the land of the rising sun.
Spammers, like 'em or not, are just exercising their rights to free speech and to free capitalistic enterprise.
You are either an idiot or a spammer yourself. Spammers usurp the resources of third parties without permission in order to distribute and store unwanted advertising. Spammers are typically sociopaths who care nothing that they are bothering others and stealing the resources of third-party ISPs.
I just suffered a mailbomb attack because the owner of www.praise-jesus.tv and documented fraud artist Clark Mankin didn't like that I complained about his spam run to QWest.net. Spammers are evil, and death is too good for them.
Spam is not 'free speech'. It is theft of service and trespass to chattel. It is no more a right than is spray-painting graffitti on privately owned businesses.
STOP MISUSING APOSTROPHES, YOU MORONS!!!
Considering that the article makes a passing reference to the fact that this incident happened on banthespam's first day, I suspect they're brand new.
Funny that the site should come from TRAC. This is a classic example of Washington "astroturf", phoney grass roots organizations. TRAC is run by Sam Simon of Issue Dynamics, a P.R. firm that works for incumbent telephone monopolists like Verizon. Their main activity is publicizing anyone but AT&T as being a better long-distance alternative to AT&T. There's a long and bitter blood feud between AT&T and Verizon (fka Bell Atlantic). Sam's a hired gun.
In this case, it's likely that Verizon is smarting over the cost of spam to its Verizon Online operation. Verizon is trying to get the FCC and/or Congress to give them an absolute monopoly over DSL ISP service. The FCC has a proposal on the table now (FCC NPRM 02-33) to remove common carriage rules from ILEC DSL, so that Verizon can say that if you use their DSL telecom service, you must use their ISP. Bye-bye to all the local ISPs who buy Verizon DSL to reach their subs. There's also the Dingell-Tauzin bill in Congress which effectively repeals the Telcom Act, and bans competitive LECs from accessing ILEC raw wire in order to provision their own DSL. Also note that Verizon Online forces you to put @verizon.net in the From: field of mail sent through their SMTP relay; you can't be From: your choice of mail hosts! Forced advertising, no less.
So when they come out with an anti-spam site (and Sam doesn't brush his teeth without a Verizon top exec's permission), I take it with a boulder of salt.
We sometimes get blamed for spam at Sneakemail.com. The funny thing is when we get blamed its because the user just forgets they are using Sneakemail and when spam gets sent through their disposable email address we provide its so transparent they forget whats happening and think we're spamming them. Actually when they get spam it means Sneakemail worked perfectly since their real email address wasnt actually spammed, as it would have been. This actually got us kicked off our first net provider.
:P
I work for Sneakemail.com. We are an anti spam site. The first and longest living disposable email address site for what its worth, over 2 years. See the sig for the link. Sneakemail is an online application that truely fights spam and lets you catch spam easily. What is this, a anti-spam petition? Thats so much easier than thousands of lines of code, why didnt we think of that, damn?
If we screw up and actually send people spam do we get a story on slashdot?
Thanks for reading, this has been a shameless promotion for Sneakemail.com
Sneakemail is to spam filters what an ounce of prevention is to a pound of cure.