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]