On Tue, 23 Sep 1997, Professional Software Engineering wrote:
The address itself IS very real. So is the individual who was quoted.
The malaprops was very real to us as well.
you realize just how little footwork is required to confirm it before
shooting off at the mouth?
At a minimum, headers from the message are required to take
even the first step. As with any report concerning email of
any kind. As you are well aware.
news.admin.net-abuse.email where it comes up periodically.
It came up today in the form of regurgitation, in a grammatically
weak message allegedly attributed to the IRS, without enough
information to enable a confirmation.
It smells like hoax to us, and so far, you are the one spreading it.
Please speak for yourself. "Smells like a hoax to you."
I was not speaking for you. I was speaking for myself and my
coworkers with whom I shared the rumor. You were quick to
flame me. I only said it had elements of a hoax. No attribution,
a very high authority cited as the originator (THE IRS for crying out
loud), a sensitive subject to the audience (which is rather accustomed
to such hoaxes!), and poor grammar to boot. What was I supposed to
think? I am skeptical. Made so from years of experience.
--
g-r-a-t-e-f-u-l-l-y---[ email:<fishbowl(_at_)conservatory(_dot_)com>
]---l-i-v-i-n-g
d-e-a-d-i-c-a-t-e-d---[ http://www.conservatory.com/ ]-----l-i-g-h-t
If a listener nods his head when you're explaining somethin, wake him up.