Subject: (fwd) Re: Real Espresso Coffee

From: JC Dill <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 22:14:43 -0700

If there was ever any doubt (as if) that our draft is sorely
needed, here is a textbook case in point.

jc

On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 19:13:24 GMT, in alt.coffee Mark
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 13:39:54 -0400, "Daniel G." <[email-masked]>
>wrote:
>
>>Hi guys!!
>>this is an interesting coffee related newsgroup.  myself got surprise with
>>the quality and rich taste I found in a espresso coffee I purchased at
>>www.sambitocoffee.com  It's an incredible site, and they offer a large
>>variety of coffee, flavours, and gifts. I think the coffee they are selling
>>is from south america, real arabica.
>>
>>Check them out,
>
>No thanks Jaime. I checked out who owns sambitocoffee.com at
>register.com instead:
>
>   Organization:
>       Canperco Inc
>       Jaime Grande
>       413 Fernleigh Cr South
>       Richmond Hill, ON M5N2M3
>       CA
>       Phone: 905-883-5276
>       Fax..: 905-883-5276
>       Email: [email-masked]
>
>So we have yet another lying retailer.... "Hey guys, look at what I
>found! The coolest site on the Net!!! They are great!!! They gave me
>custom massages along with my 12 ounce pound of coffee!!!! They named
>their first child after me because I bought a box of filters!!!"
>
>Sigh. When are you folks going to learn. Lie in here and you'll never,
>I mean never get any business froma anyone in alt.coffee. Would you,
>Jaime, buy from a retailer that was so bold-faced lying to you?
>
>I swear, there must be some stupid book out there that tells these Net
>Neophytes to do exactly this kind of advertising message in
>newsgroups... it happens too oftent to be a coincidence.
>
>Mark
>--
>Mark Prince - Web Developer and Coffee Kid
>mark @ coffeekid dot com                Work: www.webmotif.com
>Home: www.spiffle.com/webthing          Fun: www.coffeekid.com
>Consumer Reviews for Espresso machines+: www.coffeegeek.com

--

jc  (posted and emailed due to flakey news server, email or cc'd email replies appreciated for the same reason)

---

From: ColorNet Robin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 07:47:55 +0200

>needed, here is a textbook case in point.

Sorry to but in - but again taking up my minority viewpoint of some months
ago I feel the argument is to a great extent out of court.

IMHO
1)  Looking ahead 3 years bandwidth and access payments will not be a
problem
2)  The argument regarding ONLINE OFFLINE legislation still holds good and
55% of US surface mail is junk mail
3)  What constitutes SPAM remains a moot question - and the implications
for censorship of free circulation of information outweigh local skin deep
 irritation - however justified that remains.
4)  With IPv6 there will be ways of tracking and backtracking SPAM will be
the rule rather than the exception
5)  This is an unfortunate spin off of this stage of the internet but
cannot be sensibly fought against as a purely online phenomenon
6)  Perhaps closer ties with ISTF may be thought worthwhile - as ISTF will
be looking to IETF in the area of Security and Privacy

best regards Jonathan Robin
ISSG ISTF