I guess I got an answer

Discussion in 'Health and medical' started by m nesbitt, Jan 29, 2004.

  1. m nesbitt

    m nesbitt Guest

    I asked, a while back, whether this place serves a purpose.
    And, after a most interesting exchange ranging from diabetes to
    constipation to mercury amalgam and personal attacks, the answer has
    come to me.

    This place exists for three different reasons.

    For those who strongly favour alternative therapies, it's a free play
    zone. For those who don't, it's a game of "whack-a-mole".

    And, for the rest of us, it keeps the absolute loonies from both sides
    busy sniping at each other, which means we're less likely to ever meet
    them in real life.

    No offence to those with open minds from both sides, but a few voices
    seem to drown out most of the actual discussion around here.

    Thanks for the lesson...

    m nesbitt
    Cynical Optomists Unite!
     
    Tags:


  2. Baldrick

    Baldrick Guest

    The diagnose is obvious. Just block the wacky posters and enjoy what is
    left. I get 20 posts a day tops, w/o counting the spam.

    "m nesbitt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > I asked, a while back, whether this place serves a purpose.
     
  3. David Wright

    David Wright Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Baldrick <[email protected]> wrote:
    >The diagnose is obvious. Just block the wacky posters and enjoy what is
    >left. I get 20 posts a day tops, w/o counting the spam.


    While rotting in the stink of your own reflections -- god forbid you
    should ever have to encounter a contrary opinion.

    -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
    were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)





    >"m nesbitt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]
    >> I asked, a while back, whether this place serves a purpose.

    >
    >
     
  4. Carole

    Carole Guest

    "David Wright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > In article <[email protected]>,
    > Baldrick <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >The diagnose is obvious. Just block the wacky posters and enjoy what is
    > >left. I get 20 posts a day tops, w/o counting the spam.

    >
    > While rotting in the stink of your own reflections -- god forbid you
    > should ever have to encounter a contrary opinion.


    Good one Dave. I agree with you on that.

    I reckon most of the spam dispersed to the pubic is to get them to go along
    with restrictions on the internet.

    Carole
    http://www.austarmetro.com.au/~hubbca/media.htm
     
  5. David Wright

    David Wright Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Carole <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >"David Wright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]
    >> In article <[email protected]>,
    >> Baldrick <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> >The diagnose is obvious. Just block the wacky posters and enjoy what is
    >> >left. I get 20 posts a day tops, w/o counting the spam.

    >>
    >> While rotting in the stink of your own reflections -- god forbid you
    >> should ever have to encounter a contrary opinion.

    >
    >Good one Dave. I agree with you on that.
    >
    >I reckon most of the spam dispersed to the pubic is to get them to go along
    >with restrictions on the internet.


    I sure hope you mean "public" in the foregoing. :)

    In any case, I disagree with you -- most of the spam is attempting to
    sell products of dubious value.

    -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
    were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)
     
  6. [email protected] (David Wright) wrote:

    >In article <[email protected]>,
    >Carole <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>"David Wright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >>news:[email protected]
    >>> In article <[email protected]>,
    >>> Baldrick <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>> >The diagnose is obvious. Just block the wacky posters and enjoy what is
    >>> >left. I get 20 posts a day tops, w/o counting the spam.
    >>>
    >>> While rotting in the stink of your own reflections -- god forbid you
    >>> should ever have to encounter a contrary opinion.

    >>
    >>Good one Dave. I agree with you on that.
    >>
    >>I reckon most of the spam dispersed to the pubic is to get them to go along
    >>with restrictions on the internet.

    >
    >I sure hope you mean "public" in the foregoing. :)


    Perhaps she was referring to all the Viagra spam.

    >In any case, I disagree with you -- most of the spam is attempting to
    >sell products of dubious value.
    >
    > -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
    > These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    > "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
    > were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)
    >
    >


    --
    Peter Bowditch
    The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
    The Green Light http://www.ratbags.com/greenlight
    and The New Improved Quintessence of the Loon with added Vitamins and C-Q10 http://www.ratbags.com/loon
    To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
     
  7. Carole

    Carole Guest

    [email protected] (David Wright) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

    > >I reckon most of the spam dispersed to the pubic is to get them to go along
    > >with restrictions on the internet.

    >
    > I sure hope you mean "public" in the foregoing. :)


    Yeah, I meant "public" not pubic. That was a typo.

    > In any case, I disagree with you -- most of the spam is attempting to
    > sell products of dubious value.


    I'm not too sure about that, for a couple of reasons.
    (1) Remember back a couple of months ago when that Microsoft spam was
    doing the rounds with arriving emails being 157K in size? At the same
    time all the other spam dropped off, then when the ISPs figured out a
    program to screen it out, the other stuff started turning up again.

    (2) If the emails are meant to attract people to buy stuff, how come
    some of them are so poorly written and put together so seemingly in
    haste?

    There is no doubt a percentage of genuine spam trying to sell stuff,
    but basically my thinking is that possibly it is part of a plan to
    reduce free speech on the internet by getting people to get so sick of
    spam, they will agree to some sort of restrictions.

    You can't prove I'm wrong, except by saying something like "who is
    they?" and "you're paranoid" or something like that.

    Carole
    http://www.austarmetro.com.au/~hubbca/media.htm
     
  8. Eric Bohlman

    Eric Bohlman Guest

    [email protected] (Carole) wrote in
    news:[email protected]:

    > (2) If the emails are meant to attract people to buy stuff, how come
    > some of them are so poorly written and put together so seemingly in
    > haste?


    That's because the real money in spamming doesn't come from spamming for
    your own products (hardly anyone makes money that way), it comes from
    selling spam software and e-mail lists to suckers who think they can market
    their own products that way. It's really a lot like MLM, where the money
    isn't in product sales, it's in getting other people into the program, and
    most of the people involved have no sales skills at all. A sucker spams
    and his ISP shuts him down, but by the time they do the people selling spam
    tools will have found tens or hundreds more suckers.
     
  9. David Wright

    David Wright Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Carole <[email protected]> wrote:
    >[email protected] (David Wright) wrote in message
    >news:<[email protected]>...
    >
    >> >I reckon most of the spam dispersed to the pubic is to get them to go along
    >> >with restrictions on the internet.

    >>
    >> I sure hope you mean "public" in the foregoing. :)

    >
    >Yeah, I meant "public" not pubic. That was a typo.
    >
    >> In any case, I disagree with you -- most of the spam is attempting to
    >> sell products of dubious value.

    >
    >I'm not too sure about that, for a couple of reasons.
    >(1) Remember back a couple of months ago when that Microsoft spam was
    >doing the rounds with arriving emails being 157K in size? At the same
    >time all the other spam dropped off, then when the ISPs figured out a
    >program to screen it out, the other stuff started turning up again.


    Your version of history is so much more entertaining than the truth.
    No wonder you prefer your version.

    >(2) If the emails are meant to attract people to buy stuff, how come
    >some of them are so poorly written and put together so seemingly in
    >haste?


    Because the people who send them out are morons. And I have no doubt
    that a lot of them can't deliver what they claim to deliver. I refuse
    to believe there are *that* many sites selling Vicodin. Rush Limbaugh
    would never have had to get his maid to score the stuff for him if
    that were true.

    >There is no doubt a percentage of genuine spam trying to sell stuff,
    >but basically my thinking is that possibly it is part of a plan to
    >reduce free speech on the internet by getting people to get so sick of
    >spam, they will agree to some sort of restrictions.


    Ah, I should have realized you'd manage to drag in a conspiracy.

    Never attribute to evil anything that is adequately explained by
    stupidity. You'll be right a lot more often that way.

    >You can't prove I'm wrong, except by saying something like "who is
    >they?" and "you're paranoid" or something like that.


    I can't "prove" you're wrong, but you are doing a ghastly job of
    proving you even might be right.

    -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
    were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)
     
  10. Happy Dog

    Happy Dog Guest

    "David Wright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> Carole writ
    > >There is no doubt a percentage of genuine spam trying to sell stuff,
    > >but basically my thinking is that possibly it is part of a plan to
    > >reduce free speech on the internet by getting people to get so sick of
    > >spam, they will agree to some sort of restrictions.

    >
    > Ah, I should have realized you'd manage to drag in a conspiracy.
    >
    > Never attribute to evil anything that is adequately explained by
    > stupidity.


    I thought it was "Never attribute to Alice..." But I don;'t know who she
    was or who penned the phrase.

    Le M. 3
     
Loading...