good after noon sir

[Brad Johnson]

On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 06:45 -0700, Brian Beattie wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 23:52 -0700, Matthew Kuiken wrote:
> > Harry L. Lee wrote:
> > > I expected my reply to go only to the author of the original phishing 
> > > message. my apologies for offending everyone's gentle sensibilities. 
> > > perhaps the censors should spend more time on actual content than being 
> > > 4 letter cops. I personally find phishing offensive if not illegal.
> > 
> > I don't appreciate being called a four letter cop.  What I was 
> > responding to was an inappropriate response to a list email which I felt 
> > was egregious enough to warrant a request for politeness.
> > 
> > I especially come to this opinion as the original email was not 
> > phishing.  Phishing, as has been pointed out elsewhere in the thread, is 
> > about tricking someone into revealing personal information.  Whatever 
> > else it might be, the original email was not that.  At worst it may have 
> > been spam.  At best, it may have been a new subscriber that started an 
> > email, and accidentally hit send before they were done.  This latter 
> > example is why I felt your comment required response.
> 
> You are right, it was not phishing, it  was a 419 scam.  419'ers have
> not only been associated with stealing thousands, but they have actually
> been quilty of murder, 419'ers are worse than phishers.
> 
> > >     Matthew Flaschen wrote:
> > >      > Matthew Kuiken wrote:
> > >      >
> > >      >> Harry L. Lee wrote:
> > >      >>
> > >      >>> <censored for rude content>
> > >      >>>
> > >      >> #1, Please follow the code of conduct:
> > >      >> http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct
> > >      >>
> > >      >> #2, what about the original email prompted this comment????
> > >      >>
> > >      >
> > >      > Probably the fact that it had nothing except a name and bad
> > >     punctuation.
> > >      >  I suspect it is spam, but Harry was still quite rude.
> > 
> > It may have been spam, but most spam actually makes more sense than the 
> > original email.  I suspect an accidental sending of a just started email 
> > above most of the other choices.  I have had several late night emails 
> > that have looked similar after a line or two...  I hate to think what it 
> > would look like if I accidentally sent one of those.
> > 
> > -Matt Kuiken
> > 
> > 
> -- 
> Brian Beattie   LFS12947 | "Honor isn't about making the right choices.
> beattie at beattie-home.net | It's about dealing with the consequences."
> www.beattie-home.net     | -- Midori Koto

Labeling the email as phishing or 419 is inappropriate based on the
content of the message. Replying rudely to an unfounded suspicion in a
manner that breaks the code of conduct is even more inappropriate and
the moderators were quite correct to apply a little "behavior
modification". Inquiring about the basis of an unfounded suspicion is
fruitless. Can this thread die now?

Brad