| Home | Forums | Reviews | Guides | Newsgroups | Register | Search |
 |
| Thread Tools |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
| |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
| |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
"Mike Easter" <> wrote in message news:43a38fbf$0$33402$ reenews.net... > Rich Wilson wrote: >> "Mike Easter" >>>>> Mike Easter spewed forth: > >>>>>> This particular usenet beggar can be reported in the following >>>>>> ways: > >>> Figuring out which beggars are scammers who have taken in more money >>> than you or I today isn't possible from staring at the words a long >>> time. >> >> True, but it's a long time since I've come across an intelligent >> scammer who could write a reasonably convincing e-mail. > > If it is any clue, the yahoo payload addy here for your paypal donation > $ has no previous posting history prior to this thread. > > Let me see, the shaw posting account got itself a brand spanking new > yahoo addy just for the begging bizness, or what? > > Yes indeedy, that definitely makes sense. That's the way it should be > scamdone about/with a fresh yahoo addy -- now what kind of trail is > there for the shaw? > > Guess what? There's some 'nastiness' history for the IP 64.59.144.74 > because it has gotten itself into some little usenet tiffs which involve > posting headers which include the nntp posting host. Good detective work there  |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Rich Wilson wrote:
> "Mike Easter" >> Rich Wilson wrote: >>> "Mike Easter" >>>> Figuring out which beggars are scammers who have taken in more >>>> money than you or I today isn't possible from staring at the words >>>> a long time. >>> >>> True, but it's a long time since I've come across an intelligent >>> scammer who could write a reasonably convincing e-mail. >> >> the yahoo payload addy here for your paypal >> donation $ has no previous posting history prior to this thread. >> There's some 'nastiness' history for the IP 64.59.144.74 > Good detective work there The message is that we shouldn't start off by reading the words, whether it be usenet or email 'operations' for our 'evaluation' of the 'message'. If you start off by reading the words, then you start off at a 'delusional' disadvantage to the scam/spam process. The delusion is that you can handle your unknown or unsolicited mail [or usenet message in this case] in the same way you 'look at' normal mail or usenet messages. No one should open an email based on what they read in the subject/from which isn't soliticted and is from their friends or a known, or which hasn't been 'screened' by some kind of inner analysis process which can analyze the inner content in terms of scammish or spammish -ness. If you are trying to 'eyeball' your email or your usenet messages by what their subject, from, and body content is, you are going to be mislead, especially when it comes to a message which has a payload. If you are going to be a human being with normal human traits -- when you see an email which isn't known, you should be moving it into a suspicious folder or place -- and when you see a usenet message with a payload, you should shut down your 'reading' of the body's words and start looking for the evidence of the 'hook' or scamminess of the item. -- Mike Easter |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
