[SpamCop-List] Re: Email from Spamcop re: "Security Breach"

[Mike B]

"Paul Johnson" <baloo at ursine.ca> wrote in message
news:87657hbovn.fsf at ursine.ca...
> "Mike B" <mrcics2000-spamcop-nomail at nomail.yahoo.com> writes:
<snip>
> > "sandman" <sandygrafxNO at SPAMworldramp.net> wrote in message
> > news:cftd89$v0j$1 at news.spamcop.net...
> >> You might wanna try a little comprehensive reading before spouting off,
> >> fella.
> >> I don't read all the threads as I have no interest in what you or your
ilk
> >> have to say, and the subject "hello, etc." does not necessarily refer
to a
> >> "security breach".
> >> If you're close to Orlando, and would like to discuss this in person,
feel
> >> free to contact me.
> >> I'm easy to find.
> >>
> >
> > *PLONK*
> >
> > And I'd recommend the same to others..
>
> Why?  Because he points out the obvious?
<snip>

I'll count the ways in which I found his posts to be offensive.

1)
> I'd like... no, I *demand* to know to whom it was released, and to how
many others.

*demand*

2)
>a glossing over of a problem involving my security ain't gonna get it for
this ex-cop. Not even close.

He doesn't yet know what the problem is, but he already asserts that it is
being "glossed over"

I'll let the "ex-cop" pass for now, but keep it in mind.

3)
>(I've read back a couple of hundred posts, but haven't seen this subject
broached

He could NOT have *read* through the posts, otherwise he would have seen the
main thread and another shorter thread.

4)
>You might wanna try a little comprehensive reading before spouting off,
fella.

I think your "density" comment touched a tender spot. But the sentiment is
exactly as in my 3) above. But what "comprehensive reading" are you supposed
to have done?

5)
>I have no interest in what you or your ilk have to say

It is only "us ilk" that hang out here, obviously he did ask the question of
us. He did not write to site admin, he posted in the open forum. "Ilk"
touched my tender spot, but it is not so tender as "dense" is for an ex-cop.

6)
>If you're close to Orlando, and would like to discuss this in person, feel
free to contact me.

Very thinly veiled threat, appropriate from someone who uses physical force
to counter/substitute for rational thought/action. This really was the final
strike for me and the main reason for *plonk*ing him.

But think about it. You post with your full name, as well as an unmunged
email address. He posts without name and with a munged email address. Who
would be hardest to find?

So, instead of writing this initially, I just *plonked*, but since you
asked.. here it is.

So what was so obvious to you?

Mike B