Re: Unbelievable Spam.

["Alexei Roudnev" <alex () relcom net>]

Spam is VERY EFFECTIVE. It _really_ increase sales. People (yes, and me
too -:)) read SPAM and
sometimes find interesting things. (Example - yopu can hate spam, but if you
call Europe every day, and you see $.03/minute adv for long distance, you
will remember it).

Problem is, that spam is not selective, so you receive 99.99% garbage and
0.01% useful information.
(Effectiveness of spam is proven, unfortunately).

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Michael.Dillon () radianz com>
To: <nanog () merit edu>
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 2:31 AM
Subject: Re: Unbelievable Spam.


> > > Spam Hosting - from 20$ per mounth.
> > > Fraud Hosting - from 30$ per mounth.
> > > Stoln Credit Cards, Fake ID, DL's.
>
> > This is known as "Rule #3" on n.a.n-a.e... Spammers are stupid.
>
> Stupid!?
> These spammers are not stupid. There are very few legitimate
> businesses which can actually turn a profit from spamming.
> Most of the money to be made is in selling spam related software
> and services to suckers. The problem is, how do you identify
> people who are dumb enough to think that spam services are
> worth paying for?
>
> Simple. You send lots of spam which, by definition, only goes
> to people who know something about the Internet and might be
> willing to spend money on an Internet-related service. Then you
> wait for responses which, by definition, are only going to come
> from grade A suckers. Then you pounce on these hapless marks,
> rip them off and move on.
>
> Spammers are not stupid. They are smart criminal gangs which
> have not only managed to keep their schemes running for
> several years in the face of great public animosity, they have
> also managed to sabotage the efforts that supposedly work
> against them. A favorite trick is for them to go into a forum
> like NANAE and support a flawed anti-spam effort because they
> know that it keeps people from focusing on real solutions.
>
> The net effect of all of these flawed technical attacks on
> spam is that it has filtered out the naive spammers from the
> spamming community and left spamming in the control of
> criminal gangs.
>
> When will we realize that SPAM is a social problem and it
> needs a social solution? When will the major email providers
> sit down around a table and agree to some guidelines for
> email exchange that make it impossible for rogue users to
> inject large volumes of email into the system? The existing
> non-hierarchical email exchange network is not scalable.
> I hope that everyone on this list can understand what the
> email exchange overlay network is and recognize that it
> is subject to similar scaling rules as the underlying IP
> network.
>
> --Michael Dillon