Ok, James I have one for you to consider very closely related to Murphy Sewell's example and within the advertising range but maybe also with a tinge of the political or religious involved. One of the lists to which I subscribe received a posting for alternative health care from an aol address which provided no name and no signature. That means that even if people on complemed are interested in the formidable e-journal I will not post it, because on other occasions when anonymous posts were sent to another list those naive enough to reply found that they were now subscribers to lists which had nothing to do with the text of the post but actually the vehicle for global activist movements. I did not reply nor subscribe although they were attractive (both offered money for articles or employment opportunities) so neither post effects me personally, but it seems to me that in advertising that is just plain "fraud" and apparently fraud with malicious intent. I will send you the two examples which I have archived personally if they are of use in your article. [I recall one subscriber's question after having been tricked into subscribing to the activist list: "What do I do now?"] I believe that netiquette dictates providing a truthful subject line and signature in your posts. I hope this helps with your article. -- Paul. -- Dr. Paul S. di Virgilio, University of Toronto [log in to unmask]