|
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums |
|
|
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums |
|
 The Old Elsmar Cove Forums
 Internet History
 The First 'SPAM'
|
 UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: The First 'SPAM' |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 04 December 1999 01:14 PM
   
The Canter & Siegel Report, Number One ed. Thomas Leavitt (leavitt@armory.com)
Plaudits and thank you notes to Netcom for canceling their account!
CSNOTE--Canter and Siegel announce to the world where they can be flamed. CSNOTE This is to advise everyone that they may reach us on the Internet at cslaw@pericles.com. We will make the details of the actions we intend to tak with respect to Netcom, Internet Direct, and anyone who may choose to act in concert with them, known in the near future.
WHOIS PSI.COM In article <1994May23.055618.184@nntpxfer.psi.com> cslaw@pericles.com writes: > Sender: news@nntpxfer.psi.com >This is to advise everyone that they may reach us on the Internet at Well, this seems to answer several questions that people have recently - Have they gone away? Answer: No. - Are they reading these newsgroups? Answer: Probably. - What kind of machine is pericles.com? Answer: An Intel-based PC - Who is giving them NNTP service? Answer: A machine belong to Performance Systems International, If you'd like to express any opinions about this, the following might % whois psi.com Domain Name: PSI.COM Administrative Contact:
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.net-abuse,news.admin.misc,news.admin.policy I received this in my e-mailbox just now: There is also a silent majority out here that wants their activities stopped. This user appears to be correct: % telnet crl.com smtp If you would like to comment on this, here is the WHOIS record for CRL: CR Laboratories (CRL-DOM) Domain Name: CRL.COM Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact: -- From: graphx@amug.org (graphx) My name is Leigh Benson. I am a technical consultant in Phoenix, AZ. Recently there has been much ``activity'' regarding the law firm Canter & Siegel. Inappropriately, I have been linked with some of those acitivities. Please take a moment to read this. STATEMENT: Let me first state that I am *not* associated with Canter & Siegel. I did work for them in the past, but as you will see below, I dont anymore nor would I ever again. The law firm went behind my back and used a script I custom wrote for them to allow them to post to a few selected news groups that they couldent have otherwise gotten to (i.e., the forein groups) and used it to cause this whole disaster. GraphX is a company dedicated to putting business on the net the proper way. I have been on the net for 5 years and hold accounts all over the place. None of whitch i have used to post or advertise anything for Canter & Siegel. And without taking resposibility for what CSLaw did I appologise for what my script was used for. I dont support anything that sucks up resourses like what they did. ENCLOSED CORRESPONDANCE: Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 16:29:02 -0700 Dear Leigh: This is to clarify our position with respect to your employment with us. We agreed to pay you $250 per week for 12 weeks. You, in turn, agreed to do 15 hours of work per week and you also represented that your skills on the Internet and with UNIX would allow you to accomplish the work we needed. To sum up our experiences, you appear to have misrepresented your level of technical expertise such that you are unable to get any technical task accomplished. You are constantly attempting to rely on the skills of others to supplement your own. These other people usually let you down and we find ourselves having to look elsewhere to get the work done. As you know, we had to hire another person to write the script to mass post to all the news groups. It took him about two hours to do what you had been unable to accomplish in over a week. Even when we ask you to do something non-technical of which you are capable, you simply don't bother. Your primary service to us has been to talk to two local Internet providers on our behalf. At present, both of these companies seem to be unfriendly to you and neither has been willing to provide us the full access we need. In spite of your not meeting the time or skills requirements we agreed on, we have continued to pay you in full. Martha even gave you several non-technical assignments, such as looking for books in the bookstore, which you simply did not bother to do. We are no longer willing to continue paying you when you seem both unwilling and unable to do the work. You have been given every chance. We know you will take a different position, but whatever you might say, the free ride is over. We will pay you for seven hours this week because that appears to be a generous estimate of your time spent. We will pay you at the rate of $16.67 per hour, which is what you would have earned had you been putting in the 15 hours per week. Martha had advised you of this at the end of last week. We will not ask for a refund from the previous weeks when you did not come close to putting in 15 hours. If you wish us to continue calling on you, we will pay you $16 per hour, but only for work that you actually do and when you achieve good results. We have no intention of paying you $65 per hour because you clearly do not have the skills that make you worth that to us. If you want us to continue using your services on an as-needed basis for $16 per hour, please let us know. Otherwise, our relationship ends here. Sincerely, Laurence A. Canter I created some things specifically for you, YOU cannot get it to work, for some reason, you pussyfoot around by contacting me via E-mail (you have my home number and cellular. There is no excuse for not being able to reach me. I have an answering machine and SLEEP with my cellular!!!) instead of treating me as a true equal or expert and asking a simple question.... "Why can't I get this to work?" I have spent countless hours with Martha, on the phone communicating with her, and calling her back immediately when receiving her frantic "WHERE IN THE WORLD ARE YOU? I have a problem and need to talk to you NOW!" messages. I don't feel that my expertise is what should be questioned, it's the lack of communication between CSLaw. Martha tells me something in a panic, treats me like a flunky, walks on me as if I had a Dupont tag stuck to my ass, then expects me to do her bidding, the instant her majesty snaps her fingers! Larry on the other hand, doesn't seem to care how I do it, as long as it gets done... UNTIL, someone is in a panic again!!! I have never wanted to be in control. I just wanted to help you revolutionize Internet! Instead, you and your posting has raped and violated a phenomenal resource that can be used for the betterment of all man kind, not just a bunch of greedy business men (Oops! Women too. Sorry Martha!) with no respect for this resource or the countless hours and dollars that others have spent in making it what it is. Your blatant disregard for my knowledge and your insulting $16.00 an hour can be put in a fund for bandages and psycharatic counseling for your next journey down the Information Super Highway. You're gonna need it! Have A Nice Trip! Good Luck In The Future! (What Future?!) From: Eli Brian Goldberg [Unfortunately, while I understand scum-nese, I don't quite speak as Anyone think they could answer this to their satisfaction? Return-path: If you believe that the NSF AUP has been violated by their traffic reaching Marty "The Pledge of Allegiance says, 'liberty and justice for all.' Newsgroups: news.misc,news.admin.policy,news.admin.misc,alt.visa.us Look what I found in the risks forum ... regarding canter & siegel, >Laurence A. Canter & Martha S. Siegel > Subject: Disbarrable under Tenn. Code (Canter/Seigel) Subject: Green Card Con Artists Exposed! For Immediate Release SUPREME COURT GRANTS ATTORNEY'S PETITION TO RESIGN PERMANENTLY TALLAHASSEE, Oct.13-- The Florida Supreme Court has granted attorney Laurence A. Canter's petition to resign permanently, effective November 7, 1988. Canter, of 240 North Washington Boulevard, Sarasota, was charged with numerous violations of the attorney disciplinary rules including neglect, misrepresentation, misappropriation of client funds and perjury. Several of the complaints against Canter involved his failure to file the necessary or appropriate documents with the United Stated Immigration and Naturalization Services in matters of permanent residency and work visas. In addition, Canter refused to refund clients' funds and neglected to notify his clients that he has been suspended from the practice of law as a result of a previous discipline. The Florida Bar further alleges that Canter committed perjury by filing a false affidavit with the Bar and while testifying under oath in a deposition. These charges resulted after an audit of Canter's trust account by the Bar showed that trust funds were held in Canter's account during the time period when he denied any funds were present. Canter was born in 1953 and admitted to The Florida Bar in 1980. The resignation without leave to apply is not final until time expires to file motion for rehearing and if filed, determined. The filling of a motion for rehearing shall not alter the effective date of this resignation. As an official agency of the Supreme Court of Florida, The -- From: dsew@packrat.aml.arizona.edu (David Sewell) ... thus USENET spake, ...the strife which thou call'st evil, but wee style Inept as most of C&S's Mephistophelian aspirations are ("Cybersell"? Oxygenated water??!!), they did show a true Faustian genius in their shrewd manipulation of the media. No doubt they had expected a massive Usenet reaction to the Green Card posting, never once dreaming they'd have a shot at national TV. But when it came, they were prepared--not to cover their faces with their jackets and run from the photographers, not to hang their heads and apologize for their greed and stupidity, but in the best tradition of recent American overnight infamy, schooled by Tonya Harding and John Bobbitt, to lie and bluster through it, confident in their knowledge that in America in the '90s notoriety is its own reward--not that book contracts and fees for Inside Edition interviews are anything to shake a forked tail at, either. Actually, the best literary Faustian parallel to Canter's career I can think of is Saruman in Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings." Cast out of his former estate by the righteous wizards of the Florida Bar Association, Canter looks about for a rich, innocent, and apparently weaponless land that he can dominate through shrewdness and bullying. It is the Usenet Shire, whose inhabitants have grown lazily confident that their utopian anarchy is secure from outside invaders. Ruled mainly by common law and tradition, the Usenet Shire seems defenseless against a High Lawyer who comes wielding the magic runes of Torts and Statutes from the Real World. So now the Usenet Shire waits and wonders: will an on-line Frodo grown in wisdom and power step forward to defend his land? Or will Canter/Saruman be undone by some vengeful Wormtongue of his own creation? (There are hints, perhaps, in the recent posting by a "CSLaw Insider"...) No, Laurence Canter and his consort are not the Devil and his dam, and as some Usenet posters have argued, in a world that contains Bosnia and Ruwanda the Green Card spam is relatively low on the scale of evils. Still I believe that our outrage is justified: Canter and Siegel *are* evil to the extent that their actions exemplify Satanic principles--and I mean that term to be understood in a general moral and psychological sense rather than in any narrow theological context. Sadly, it's not the grand, bold rebellion of Milton's Lucifer, but a puny, weaselly brand of Satanism; C&S's Cybersell manifestoes are to Milton's rhetoric what a poorly suppressed fart is to a thunderclap. Milton's Lucifer at least had the bravado to challenge Heaven's archangels to their face; Laurence Canter, although with pericles.com he is now de facto a news administrator, has shown neither the courage nor the common decency to enter into any Usenet forum to defend his actions. That is the stance of a coward; and it should be some measure of comfort to the Usenet community that cowardice is a serious handicap to the career success of would-be tyrants and usurpers. -- [This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 04 December 1999).] IP: Logged |
All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
|
Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!
UBB 5.45c
Main Site Search 
