iluvls@convex.csd.uwm.edu (James E Parks) (05/30/91)
Two days ago I posted an article concerning a certain get rich quick scheme, of which I did not know was illegal. I am sorry for posting FAST CASH and was not attempting to defraud anyone. I was not aware that such messages were illegal and am sorry for inconviencing anyone who might have been offended, and any disk space wasted on this. This will not happen again, and again I am sorry. J. Parks P.S. I am all for Death to DAVE RHODES
callahan@cs.jhu.edu (Paul Callahan) (05/30/91)
In article <12594@uwm.edu> iluvls@convex.csd.uwm.edu (James E Parks) writes: > [profuse apologies, ending with:] > > P.S. > > I am all for Death to DAVE RHODES This is the most pathetic thing I've seen in my life. My translation reads: "I'm very sorry, but I sure hope they get that other guy who put me up to it." Is there no longer any such thing as taking personal responsibility? I'm willing to forgive purely moronic behavior, but not when it has this sort of sentiment tacked on to the end. -- Paul Callahan callahan@cs.jhu.edu
mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) (05/30/91)
In article <callahan.675565596@newton.cs.jhu.edu> callahan@cs.jhu.edu (Paul Callahan) writes: >In article <12594@uwm.edu> iluvls@convex.csd.uwm.edu (James E Parks) writes: >> [profuse apologies, ending with:] >> >> P.S. >> >> I am all for Death to DAVE RHODES > >This is the most pathetic thing I've seen in my life. My translation reads: >"I'm very sorry, but I sure hope they get that other guy who put me up to it." >Is there no longer any such thing as taking personal responsibility? I'm >willing to forgive purely moronic behavior, but not when it has this sort >of sentiment tacked on to the end. > Agreed. Was Dave Rhodes the person who put him up to it, or was Dave Rhodes the person who publicly expressed disapproval when the con game message appeared? At any rate, if James Parks really "did not mean to defraud anybody" (as he said in his apology), then his knowledge of mathematics is sadly deficient. All pyramid schemes fail because they require impossibly large numbers of people, often exceeding the population of the earth after ten or fewer steps. My message to James Parks would be this: Until you learn that there is no honest way of getting something for nothing, you will be a willing victim of every con game that comes along. -- ------------------------------------------------------- Michael A. Covington | Artificial Intelligence Programs The University of Georgia | Athens, GA 30602 U.S.A. -------------------------------------------------------
snicoud@boeing.com (Stephen L Nicoud) (05/31/91)
In article <callahan.675565596@newton.cs.jhu.edu> callahan@cs.jhu.edu (Paul Callahan) writes: >In article <12594@uwm.edu> iluvls@convex.csd.uwm.edu (James E Parks) writes: >> [profuse apologies, ending with:] >> >> P.S. >> >> I am all for Death to DAVE RHODES > >This is the most pathetic thing I've seen in my life. My translation reads: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Are you sure about that? The "most pathetic thing"? In your _life_? I can think of a lot of things more pathetic than that and I'm sure you can, too. >"I'm very sorry, but I sure hope they get that other guy who put me up to it." >Is there no longer any such thing as taking personal responsibility? I'm >willing to forgive purely moronic behavior, but not when it has this sort >of sentiment tacked on to the end. No flame intended here, but I think you are being overly harsh. I've seen the messages from the postmaster at the UWM site and feel more than satisfied that the "offender" was just plain naive and ignorant. He has obviously been educated (albeat with a firehose). The postmaster described the user as being extremely "contrite" about his action. It's pretty clear that James pushed one of your hot buttons. But it isn't clear that any great harm was done. James' posting was followed with more than enough articles that made it clear to readers that the activity was illegal and not appropriate. The "Dave Rhoades" postings have been appearing for years. James won't be the last one to do it. I know, through the postmaster at UWM, that James is very much aware of the trouble he has caused and why his posting triggered it. I don't believe, however, that continued berating will accomplish much. Like I said at the beginning, this is not meant as a flame. Think of it as a request for a tempered response to James' apology. Best Regards, Stephen -- Stephen L Nicoud <snicoud@boeing.com> uw-beaver!bcsaic!snicoud Boeing Computer Services Research and Technology, Computer Science Bellevue, Washington USA
n2557@cypress01.cray.com (Steven Levine) (05/31/91)
In article <1991May30.025825.29490@athena.cs.uga.edu> mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes: >At any rate, if James Parks really "did not mean to defraud anybody" >(as he said in his apology), then his knowledge of mathematics is sadly >deficient. All pyramid schemes fail because they require impossibly large >numbers of people, often exceeding the population of the earth after >ten or fewer steps. When people try to interest me in a chain letter/pyramid scheme, I try to point out that for every dollar you come out ahead, someone somewhere comes out one dollar behind (there have been no exchange of goods or services, just money being shuffled around). For some reason, this usually takes enormous amounts of energy and argument, though most eventually come to understand the point. I point out that this feels like stealing to me, but that's idiosyncratic. As long as they understand that somebody else is losing money if they gain, then it's not up to me to tell them it's wrong. I often get the response, "But it's only $1" (or 5, or whatever). Steven Levine n2557@cypress.cray.com
schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher) (05/31/91)
[apology for pyramid scheme, followed by flames] Hey, don't dump on this guy too much. He did apologize, which is far too rare on the Net.
tmkk@uiuc.edu (K. Khan) (05/31/91)
In article <48316@bcsaic.UUCP> snicoud@boeing.com (Stephen L Nicoud) writes: > >I know, through the postmaster at UWM, that James is very much aware >of the trouble he has caused and why his posting triggered it. I >don't believe, however, that continued berating will accomplish much. I agree. This kind of thing occurs often enough that you'd think site administrators would make all new accountholders fully aware of net.etiquette, including the posting of Craig Shergold appeals and pyramid scams. At this University, students must go to the computer lab, show their ID, sign a sheet, and then they get a little paper card with their signon. I suspect most sites have similar procedures. Why not make up a xeroxed sheet of paper with some guidelines on it to be handed out in addition to the little card with their signon? Or, the more ambitious could conduct little mini-training sessions: get the new people up to speed on the machines, and at the same time tell them about the little net.no-nos they want to avoid. I believe that we would see an immediate reduction in the "naive" postings. Sysadms, are you listening?
phil@eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) (05/31/91)
In article <48316@bcsaic.UUCP>, snicoud@boeing.com (Stephen L Nicoud) writes: |> I know, through the postmaster at UWM, that James is very much aware |> of the trouble he has caused and why his posting triggered it. Especially since the guy cancelled the article shortly after posting it. I sent him what I hope was rather polite mail telling him the article was a no-no. He immediately said he would cancel it and within 2 hours, the original article was gone off of our news host (I wish I could say the same for all the followup messages!). |> I |> don't believe, however, that continued berating will accomplish much. I agree. Enough is enough. New news users should be required to read ALL postings in news.announce.newusers. That's why that newsgroup exists, and the postings there DO cover the pyramid scheme letters. William LeFebvre Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Northwestern University <phil@eecs.nwu.edu>
jfw@ksr.com (John F. Woods) (05/31/91)
snicoud@boeing.com (Stephen L Nicoud) writes: >In article <callahan.675565596@newton.cs.jhu.edu> callahan@cs.jhu.edu (Paul Callahan) writes: >>This is the most pathetic thing I've seen in my life. My translation reads: > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >No flame intended here, but I think you are being overly harsh. I've >seen the messages from the postmaster at the UWM site and feel more >than satisfied that the "offender" was just plain naive and ignorant. >He has obviously been educated (albeat with a firehose). The >postmaster described the user as being extremely "contrite" about his >action. I happened to send James a message myself, and received a reply roughly like what was posted, which didn't include the comment about wanting to nail the probably-mythical Dave Rhodes. I am quite content with his apology, and would like to ask that we drop this before the phone charges exceed what a successful scam would have raked in...
callahan@cs.jhu.edu (Paul Callahan) (05/31/91)
In article <48316@bcsaic.UUCP> snicoud@boeing.com (Stephen L Nicoud) writes: [about my reaction to the apology] >No flame intended here, but I think you are being overly harsh. Yeah. I guess so. But, even so, I would have more respect for the poster if he had taken all the blame for himself and not shifted any to the originator of the letter. I guess I'm of the "honor among thieves" school of thought. Anyway, if there is such a thing as criminal insanity, then there ought to be such a thing as criminal stupidity, and the willing dupes of pyramid schemes fit the bill nicely. I hope this fellow has learned from his mistakes. I mean, I hope he has learned "you can't get something for nothing," not just "don't try anything funny on the net." -- Paul Callahan callahan@cs.jhu.edu
whos@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Ben Feen) (06/01/91)
In article <1991May30.025825.29490@athena.cs.uga.edu> mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes: >In article <callahan.675565596@newton.cs.jhu.edu> callahan@cs.jhu.edu (Paul Callahan) writes: >>In article <12594@uwm.edu> iluvls@convex.csd.uwm.edu (James E Parks) writes: >>> [profuse apologies, ending with:] >>> >>> P.S. >>> >>> I am all for Death to DAVE RHODES >> >>This is the most pathetic thing I've seen in my life. My translation reads: >>"I'm very sorry, but I sure hope they get that other guy who put me up to it." >>Is there no longer any such thing as taking personal responsibility? I'm >>willing to forgive purely moronic behavior, but not when it has this sort >>of sentiment tacked on to the end. >> > >Agreed. >Was Dave Rhodes the person who put him up to it, or was Dave Rhodes the >person who publicly expressed disapproval when the con game message appeared? Dave Rhodes is the asshole who first said "Hmm, it works OK as a chain letter... How about as a TEXT FILE!" He wrote the file which begins: My name is Dave Rhodes... -- whos@ddsw1.MCS.COM | I don't know, who's at DDSW1? | whos@ddsw1.MCS.COM! I asked YOU who's at DDSW1! Ok, there's a guy at DDSW1, right? | Right! Who? | Exactly! | What? | No, he's at lll-winken. | Where? | No, What! | I don't know! | He's at gargoyle. | Who? | No, he's at DDSW1.MCS.COM!
garyt@ios.Convergent.COM (Gary Tse) (06/03/91)
callahan@cs.jhu.edu (Paul Callahan) writes: |In article <12594@uwm.edu> iluvls@convex.csd.uwm.edu (James E Parks) writes: |> I am all for Death to DAVE RHODES |My translation reads: |"I'm very sorry, but I sure hope they get that other guy who put me up to it." Is there really a Dave Rhodes who goes from campus to campus convincing foolish young men to participate in these pyramid schemes? -- Gary Tse, garyt@Convergent.COM (408) 435-3540 I know engineers. They love to change things. - Dr. McCoy