|
|
 | | Re: Lugnet CSOTW Spam
|
| Well, then, I'm sorry to have stirred things up. Few things get my dander up faster than phone solicitors and email spam from private parties. (Not much can be done about spam-bots) I'm glad it was a mistake, and not an actual spam effort. ~Mark (...) (23 years ago, 9-May-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Lugnet CSOTW Spam
|
| All ~ First of all, the Lugnet CSOTW Spam came from me. Unfortunately, before this evening, I did not know what "spam" was or, for that matter, whose e-mail was in my address book. This was not a "massive spam", I only wanted to send the site (...) (23 years ago, 9-May-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Todd, could you please resend me my password?
|
| Todd, my server won't let me send normal mail to you, so I'm sorry I have to ask this way. My system crashed and my settings are all messed up, and some data was lost. Right now I get prompted every time in lugnet replies if I have read the terms of (...) (23 years ago, 9-May-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Lugnet CSOTW Spam
|
| (...) I got one as well. I did have a transaction with the person a few months ago, though, so I'd guess they just emailed everyone in their address book... Jeff "You spoony bard!" (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Lugnet CSOTW Spam
|
| (...) Well, I second the motion. ~Mark "still really grumpy about it" Sandlin (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Lugnet CSOTW Spam
|
| (...) yah, I got the same exact mail, and also got it on one of the lego club mailing lists I read - with the exact same message id - massive spamming, imo... I think that site should be removed from the nomination. but that's just me :) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Lugnet CSOTW Spam
|
| I received this message in my email box this morning. (...) I have snipped the sender's email, to protect their privacy. Usually I just forgive the occasional random emails about LEGO that I occasionally receive from people I have bought from (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Length of lines
|
| (...) 80 is the width of the "standard" screen, but messages should be wrapped somewhat before that. (23 years ago, 5-May-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Length of lines
|
| (...) If it was 80, and most screens were 80x24, as soon as the first quote happened it would wrap wrong. :) 72 has been the de-facto standard for as long as I can remember (i think? was it ever mentioned in an RFC?). (23 years ago, 5-May-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Length of lines
|
| Heh, guess my reader is set to 76! :) M$ default, I suspect. Build On! John Matthews John Matthews <jmatthew@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message news:GCu517.1Kv@lugnet.com... (...) ___...___ (...) 12345678901234567890...7890123456 (...) (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
|
