From: Flame Remailer <remailer@flame.alias.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 95 17:41:19 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: (noise) Re: SPAM bait
In-Reply-To: <199509161913.PAA55049@tequesta.gate.net>
Message-ID: <199509170041.CAA29649@utopia.hacktic.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> What I don't understand about inappropriate SPAMs like that one
> (or telephone ads) is; what's the business incentive to do it?
> I assume that no Cypherpunk has subscribed to "Janet's" magazines,
> and I know that no Ray has _EVER_ spent money over a telephone
> unless we initiated the call, yet *still* we get unwanted calls
> every once-in-a-while. WHY?

Well, that may be true, but I'd suspect that the average IQ on this
list is significantly higher than the net at large.  So if you spammed
enough newsgroups, chances are that you'd find a sucker somewhere.

Even tho it is becoming more common for marketing firms to keep
databases of who buys (or doesn't buy) what, I suspect that a lot of
calling is still done at random (the local newspaper still calls us
even tho we have subscribed for years and told them several times that
they are wasting their time calling.  So I suspect it is just done at
random.)

These days, many telemarketers have autodialers that call ahead and then
connect a salesman after you have answered the phone.  So if I get a call,
say hello, and hear silence and then a click of being transfered to the
next available salesperson, that it is my cue to hang up. 

> [Please respond privately to liberty@gate.net ]

uh, well at least this post is labelled 'noise' for the mailfilters...