What are your thoughts on.....

Hello,
As a senior in high school, i was able to get my private pilot's
license on dec 31, 2003. i love flying(what pilot doesn't, right?)
but i'm looking for a cheaper way to build hours then renting. i was
just playing with an idea, and i wanted your responses. Would an
airplane owner ever offer to share operating expenses for payment to
share a plane? i know that i would have to be put on an insurance
plan, and i of course would pay for over half of the owners insurance
payement, plus whatever kind of costs for annuals and other
inspections. i know this is almost like co-ownership, but i don't
have the resources to be buying a plane. I'm not trying to ask for
something for nothing, as i've said, i'll pay for operating and
insurance costs, as agreed with an owner.

Well, how would you respond to this kind of proposal? let me know!

Thanks in advance,
Benjamin

If you want to email me....
#b#a#s#o#g#@#r#r#c#n#e#t#.#o#r#g#

I tried to email you but your email system rejected my address:

Recipient address:
Reason: Server rejected MAIL FROM address.
Diagnostic code: smtp;550 5.0.0 porn spamming network
Remote system: dns;mail.rrcnet.org
(TCP|167.206.5.72|57474|209.105.74.131|25) (rrc2.rrcnet.org ESMTP Hello from
rrcnet; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 19:51:13 -0600)


My domain is optonline.net, which is a major cable internet ISP. If you
block optonline.net then you stop email from millions of legitimate
addresses.

Good luck.


"Ben" wrote in message
om...
Hello,
As a senior in high school, i was able to get my private pilot's
license on dec 31, 2003. i love flying(what pilot doesn't, right?)
but i'm looking for a cheaper way to build hours then renting. i was
just playing with an idea, and i wanted your responses. Would an
airplane owner ever offer to share operating expenses for payment to
share a plane? i know that i would have to be put on an insurance
plan, and i of course would pay for over half of the owners insurance
payement, plus whatever kind of costs for annuals and other
inspections. i know this is almost like co-ownership, but i don't
have the resources to be buying a plane. I'm not trying to ask for
something for nothing, as i've said, i'll pay for operating and
insurance costs, as agreed with an owner.

Well, how would you respond to this kind of proposal? let me know!

Thanks in advance,
Benjamin

If you want to email me....
#b#a#s#o#g#@#r#r#c#n#e#t#.#o#r#g#

My domain is optonline.net, which is a major cable internet ISP. If you
block optonline.net then you stop email from millions of legitimate
addresses.

Otherwise known as SPAM. The only people I want to hear from in my inbox are
my friends, family and those I have given permission to email me. I am not
trying to be arrogant, but I HATE unsolicited email with a passion.

Richard

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
et...
I tried to email you but your email system rejected my address:

Recipient address:
Reason: Server rejected MAIL FROM address.
Diagnostic code: smtp;550 5.0.0 porn spamming network
Remote system: dns;mail.rrcnet.org
(TCP|167.206.5.72|57474|209.105.74.131|25) (rrc2.rrcnet.org ESMTP Hello
from
rrcnet; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 19:51:13 -0600)


Good luck.


"Ben" wrote in message
om...
Hello,
As a senior in high school, i was able to get my private pilot's
license on dec 31, 2003. i love flying(what pilot doesn't, right?)
but i'm looking for a cheaper way to build hours then renting. i was
just playing with an idea, and i wanted your responses. Would an
airplane owner ever offer to share operating expenses for payment to
share a plane? i know that i would have to be put on an insurance
plan, and i of course would pay for over half of the owners insurance
payement, plus whatever kind of costs for annuals and other
inspections. i know this is almost like co-ownership, but i don't
have the resources to be buying a plane. I'm not trying to ask for
something for nothing, as i've said, i'll pay for operating and
insurance costs, as agreed with an owner.

Well, how would you respond to this kind of proposal? let me know!

Thanks in advance,
Benjamin

If you want to email me....
#b#a#s#o#g#@#r#r#c#n#e#t#.#o#r#g#

"Soon_To_Fly" wrote in message
e.rogers.com...
My domain is optonline.net, which is a major cable internet ISP. If you
block optonline.net then you stop email from millions of legitimate
addresses.

Otherwise known as SPAM. The only people I want to hear from in my inbox
are
my friends, family and those I have given permission to email me. I am not
trying to be arrogant, but I HATE unsolicited email with a passion.

I don't think he means "you stop millions of legitimate pieces of email".
He just means there are millions of legitimate addresses, a handful of whom
might actually send you email. For example, if one of your friends or
family or those you have given permission to email you are using
optonline.net, they would not be able to send you email.

I hate spam as much as they next guy, but seems like you're flying off the
handle a bit here...

On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 03:35:28 GMT, "Soon_To_Fly"
wrote:

My domain is optonline.net, which is a major cable internet ISP. If you
block optonline.net then you stop email from millions of legitimate
addresses.

Otherwise known as SPAM. The only people I want to hear from in my inbox are

No, there has been great difficulty defining spam, but it is generally
accepted as UBE, or commercial stuff that has not been signed up for.
On thing it is not is simply unsolicited e-mail from the normal person
on use net.

my friends, family and those I have given permission to email me. I am not
trying to be arrogant, but I HATE unsolicited email with a passion.

Then don't post on newsgroups or be thoughtful enough to put a
statement in your sig to reply only on usenet and the reply address is
invalid.
Any one using that approach and posting on use net should at least
make such a statement in their sig.

The original post was of such a nature than many on here would tend to
give it a personal reply and it contains an address for replying. You
only have to remove the characters. Hence it provides a method of
replying directly and has nothing to do with your spam response. He
took a very good approach. That his ISP is out in left field is not
his fault.

My ISP decided to start filtering. The problem was they were
filtering on content and although many argue vehemently to the
contrary I have found that filtering on content gives too many false
positives. My wife and I both do a lot of on-line work and we depend
on e-mail. It used to be something on which we could depend and where
I worked was the same. (I was one of the sys admins). WE also do a
lot of business via e-mail so false positives can cost money.

Fortunately as a dot com I have enough authority on the web hosting I
can set the filters as I wish. So I set them to only tag spam and
viruses as junk mail. The mistakes that system makes is amazing, but
this way I just glance through the *stuff* and delete what I don't
want.

I can understand dumping some ISPs into a black hole that actively
host spammers, but the cable networks with millions of customers have
a tremendous job of eliminating the idiots who do not use any
protection on their computers and then end up and an open proxy or
relay for spammers. Remember that nearly all the viruses so far have
been of a nature that the user does it to them selves. It's not the OS
it's the users.

Some ISPs black hole any of the cable networks. I'd change ISPs in
that case.

One more thing. My address is "munged" but can be figured out. It is
not that way because of spam. In all the years on the net I've never
had a problem with spam and I've had a rather high profile. It is
that way because the average user doesn't practice safe computing. I
saw a figure on one of the news programs and I think one virus checker
uses it in an add, that something like half the computers hooked to
the internet have been infected by a virus or worm at one time or
another. My address is munged because I was receiving bounce messages
due to some one, or more likely several who had me in their address
books had opened that worm attachment going around. They only open
attachments from people they know. They never stop to think those are
the people who have them in their address books and that is the most
likely place for the virus to originate. They should black hole all
the ISPs sending out those bounce messages and the two worst are AOL
and Microsoft. (or they were)

I've taught this stuff at the university level and I can say with
great certainty that the average user is clueless. The people in
those classes were certainly above average, had to use computers on a
daily basis and over 90 % of them were clueless.

Having spent my professional carer in CS I have very little tolerance
for either the poorly designed spam filters, or ISPs who simply black
hole the large providers to the general public. OTOH I agree whole
heartedly with them for black holing the ISPs that support the
spammers.

Oh... The spammers have figured out that a user activated worm can be
designed to harvest e-mail addresses, so many of the computers
infected in the last 6 months have been doing two things. They have
been providing the spamers with millions of addresses that they could
not obtain otherwise AND they are installing trojans in those infected
computers to send spam for them. So we are finding that some of the
people who are vehemently against spam are the ones sending it and
they have no idea it's coming from them.

It's reaching the point where those with infected computers will have
their service terminated and only be allowed back on after they prove
their system is clean. That means paying the ISP to come out and check
it.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com


Richard

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
. net...
I tried to email you but your email system rejected my address:

Recipient address:
Reason: Server rejected MAIL FROM address.
Diagnostic code: smtp;550 5.0.0 porn spamming network
Remote system: dns;mail.rrcnet.org
(TCP|167.206.5.72|57474|209.105.74.131|25) (rrc2.rrcnet.org ESMTP Hello
from
rrcnet; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 19:51:13 -0600)


Good luck.


"Ben" wrote in message
om...
Hello,
As a senior in high school, i was able to get my private pilot's
license on dec 31, 2003. i love flying(what pilot doesn't, right?)
but i'm looking for a cheaper way to build hours then renting. i was
just playing with an idea, and i wanted your responses. Would an
airplane owner ever offer to share operating expenses for payment to
share a plane? i know that i would have to be put on an insurance
plan, and i of course would pay for over half of the owners insurance
payement, plus whatever kind of costs for annuals and other
inspections. i know this is almost like co-ownership, but i don't
have the resources to be buying a plane. I'm not trying to ask for
something for nothing, as i've said, i'll pay for operating and
insurance costs, as agreed with an owner.

Well, how would you respond to this kind of proposal? let me know!

Thanks in advance,
Benjamin

If you want to email me....
#b#a#s#o#g#@#r#r#c#n#e#t#.#o#r#g#

Roger Halstead wrote:

They should black hole all
the ISPs sending out those bounce messages and the two worst are AOL
and Microsoft. (or they were)

Well, *now* the bounce messages carry the virus themselves and the senders are
forged. I must've gotten at least 30 "bounces" from various addresses purporting
to be the filter at "america. net" before I finally just added the entire domain
to my block list.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

"Soon_To_Fly" wrote in message
e.rogers.com...
My domain is optonline.net, which is a major cable internet ISP. If you
block optonline.net then you stop email from millions of legitimate
addresses.

Otherwise known as SPAM. The only people I want to hear from in my inbox
are
my friends, family and those I have given permission to email me. I am not
trying to be arrogant, but I HATE unsolicited email with a passion.

Richard



Hey Richard, anytime someone asks for information, and supplies their email
address, the reply is solicited, by definition.

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
et...
[...]
My domain is optonline.net, which is a major cable internet ISP. If you
block optonline.net then you stop email from millions of legitimate
addresses.

Why you replied by email, I don't know. However, as far as the blocked
domain goes, it's likely he has nothing to do with that.

Probably his ISP is using one of those obnoxious black-hole lists that
automatically detects spam and adds IP ranges from which the spam originated
to its database. Of course, since a third of all spam these days is being
sent from compromised but otherwise legitimate users, this sort of idiotic
solution results in innocent bystanders getting their email blocked.

My ISP provides this kind of "service", and once I found out what was going
on, I told them to disable it for my email. I don't get any more spam than
I used to, and I don't have friends and family complaining that they can't
send me email anymore.

Pete

In article ,
Peter Duniho wrote:

Probably his ISP is using one of those obnoxious black-hole lists that
automatically detects spam and adds IP ranges from which the spam originated
to its database.

The problem is that some people get so much spam that if they didn't
take drastic filtering measures they wouldn't get your email anyway --
they wouldn't have time to sift through the spam looking for it.

Of course, since a third of all spam these days is being
sent from compromised but otherwise legitimate users, this sort of idiotic
solution results in innocent bystanders getting their email blocked.

Not really. 'Compromised' broadband users infected with viruses that
turn them into spam zombies should still be sending their legitimate
email through their ISP's server, which will not be on the DUL-style
lists I assume you are refering to. There is plenty of collateral
damage from IP blocking, but the cause of those blocks is usually ISP
supported spam.

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

"Ben Jackson" wrote in message
news:RSR5c.27524$JL2.318706@attbi_s03...
The problem is that some people get so much spam that if they didn't
take drastic filtering measures they wouldn't get your email anyway --
they wouldn't have time to sift through the spam looking for it.

Did you read my post? I had my ISP *** DISABLE *** the black-hole list
functionality for my email account, and it produced NO CHANGE in the amount
of spam I receive.

Not only was it blocking legitimate email, it turned out it did not appear
to be blocking any spam that SpamAssassin (which my ISP also runs) wasn't
already catching.

Obviously it is possible to filter out spam without resorting to such
drastic measures.

Not really. 'Compromised' broadband users infected with viruses that
turn them into spam zombies should still be sending their legitimate
email through their ISP's server, which will not be on the DUL-style
lists I assume you are refering to.

You have no clue about what you're talking about. The reason that I had my
ISP disable the black-hole list was that domains such as aol.com,
comcast.com, and cox.net were being blocked. These are all "respectable"
ISPs who take a no-tolerance stance toward their users sending spam.

The same tool, by the way, was blocking another friend's email because he
was running his own email server behind a dynamic IP address. Yet another
inappropriately blocked, perfectly legitimate source of email.

Your claim that those sources of email "will not be on the DUL-style lists"
is just plain wrong.

There is plenty of collateral
damage from IP blocking, but the cause of those blocks is usually ISP
supported spam.

Baloney. I receive practically no email from anyone using an ISP that
supports spam. I doubt I know ANYONE who uses an ISP that supports spam.
And yet email sent to me was getting blocked on a regular basis, because
those spam-intolerant ISPs that my friends and family do use were still
getting blocked.

Do you really believe that Ben or his ISP at rrcnet.org have blocked the
optonline.net domain as a spamming network legitimately?

Pete