] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

["Dennis S. Wish PE" <wish(--nospam--at)cyberg8t.com>]

I have seen that Andrew responded to Ron Fong's private email and am glad to
see this resolved. For those of  you still skeptical, I would like to offer
my $.50 worth.

I have lost contact with Andrew for the last few years as he moved around
the state in semi-retirement. Although I was happy to finally locate him on
the Internet, I was not pleased with the content of either message.
I emailed Andrew privately and he responded with his phone number. For the
next hour, we caught up on old times and I learned where the problem was in
the events that took place.

First a few bits of background. As I mentioned in my previous post, Andrew
has been the Sysop for the Engineering Bulletin Board Service (EBBS) which
supported the efforts of SEAOC for many years prior to our list.
Andrew is a die-hard DOS lover who finds total comfort in the black screen
with an innocuous letter and '>" symbol. He is also the last of the (well
maybe not the last) supporters of Bulletin Boards over the Internet and has
avoided the "Net" until about six months ago. He finally broke down and
loaded Windows 3.1 so as to get online with AOL. Although he has been
marketing
software for many years, he has not become Internet literate until his
subscription to AOL started.

Andrew's marketing scheme included searching for engineers who would benefit
from his software. His intention was to send the shareware software to these
people for evaluation - not a particularly welcoming thought. If they found
the software useful
they might register it for a fee.
Andrew did not know that sending a shareware file (it took me about six
minutes at
28.8Kb to download) unsolicited was one of the most heinous offenses you can
make on the Net. He also did not understand why those he sent the program
attacked him so strongly. He reasoned that if you don't want the software
simply delete it, and did not consider the consequences should all vendors
decide to adopt this practice.
In his letter to Ron, his lack of knowledge about the Netslang "spam" was
one example of his neophyte status.
I spent some time explaining to Andrew the consequenses of what he did. This
and the fact that Ron Fong took the time and effort to privately write
Andrew in order to patch up any misunderstand, provided Andrew a valuable
lesson in Netiquete. Please understand that this was an error in judgement
that was not completely thought out in advance. What appeared to be a good
marketing idea turned to potential business suicide.

Along with Lew Midlam, I'd like to welcome Andrew to our list and simply
forget the indescretion. I know that most of you do not know Andrew, but I
have for over twelve years. I know he would never have deliberatly committed
this defense if he was aware of the general consensus against such actions.
To illustrate the problem, I wanted to send him my daily catch of spam -
"Are you in need of a lifestyle Change....?", "Free Live Sex!!!!", "Mars
Site to Add to Your XMas list", "Amazing Kitchen Table!" and my recent
Internet Explorer 4.0 upgrade (24Mb) but did not want to take the time to
email them.

Finally, Andrew learned quickly that 6000 to 1 are not good odds if you wish
to make friends and sell software and am confident that he learned a valid
lesson. So lets all
Welcome him to our list with 6,000 private emails sent to ------ No, maybe
that's not a good idea.

Respectfully (which is an appropriate signoff)

Dennis S. Wish PE (and Public Defender)