Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Spam

When Spammers Try To Sue You 756

Posted by timothy from the a-reputation-of-solid-gold dept.
An Anonymous Coward writes: "I was looking for information about what recourse there is against spammers when I came across this site. It appears that Bernard Shifman sent email to several people trying to solcit employment via spam, and when they replied to him, asking him to stop, and reporting the spam to his ISP he threatend them with a lawsuit. It's a very entertaining read."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

When Spammers Try To Sue You More

When Spammers Try To Sue You

Comments Filter:
  • He's been discussed to death for his escapades -- and all of 'em have "Coffee & Cat" warnings. It's laughable at best -- and lawsuits aren't valid until you get that supena in the snail mail.
    • well I thought the discourse with Mrs. Atkins was even funnier, she's about the later part of december e-mails and her reply on january is classic.

      BUt the best one was that legal guy at the end. 2 pages worth.

      Onepoint

  • Could have avoided this waste of time.. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by soundsop ( 228890 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @03:31AM (#2808241) Homepage
    When Neil Schwartzman, the person who received the spam, forwarded it to the appropriate places why did he include the spammer on the email?

    I hate spammers as much as the next guy. I report them (without copying them on the email) and move on. Although the spam receiver is, of course, blamess in this, I think he could have avoided this whole silly mess.

    • Re:Could have avoided this waste of time.. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Cato the Elder ( 520133 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @05:11AM (#2808424) Homepage
      I think in this case it would have been a gross discourtesy not to have CC'd the sender. The sender didn't have to respond with a profanity laced email and then threats of lawsuits. He could have responded, and CC'd his ISP

      I'm sorry, my email reached you in error. I was under the impression that this address was one used by Concordia University to accept resumes.

      And _then_ this whole mess could have been avoided by both sides. (err, actually, probably not, the spammer seems pretty persistently dumb).

  • Tough luck... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Joakim A ( 313708 )
    Wonder what his reacaction to being appreciated by the /. community is?

    /J
  • but why they still spam...does it really work to
    spam?

    • Re:spammers are a pest (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ErikTheRed ( 162431 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @05:23AM (#2808444) Homepage
      Unfortunately, many, many people buy things because of spam. It's actually one of the more effective ways to mass-market all kinds of crap. As long as there's good money in it, we'll have to deal with spam, regardless of what laws are passed (think offshore servers, etc.).

      • Re:spammers are a pest (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Xesdeeni ( 308293 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @10:43AM (#2809205)
        Forget the law, I think we can eliminate most SPAM very simply with as small change to current technology I've outlined before:

        "I can't figure out who to open a discussion with about this, but I have this simple idea that should at least eliminate the anonymous/spoofed spam, which is all I get.

        You simply modify the mail servers to query the sending server whether a received mail actually came from that server. The query is a key based on the contents of the message and a key included with the message, which is itself based on the same contents and a private key of the sending server. If the sending server has been upgraded with this feature, it can validate, or not, the message. If it's not validated, the message is bounced. For backwards compatibility, if the sending server hasn't been upgraded, the message always goes through. [Here's the beauty of the idea:] But as more servers are upgraded, fewer and fewer servers will be able to be used as scapegoats for spoofed spam, and pressure will mount to upgrade these servers as well.

        Eventually, the only spam you will get will be from a valid return address, which can be handled more effectively in more conventional ways. In fact, adding manual bouncing at this stage might be helpful as well, since now it really will bounce back to the sender.

        I realize I've glossed over some details here, and someone much more experienced in mail servers will have to massage this approach to make it practical, but I think the germ of a very simple but effective idea is here."

        Xesdeeni
        • [Here's the beauty of the idea:] But as more servers are upgraded, fewer and fewer servers will be able to be used as scapegoats for spoofed spam, and pressure will mount to upgrade these servers as well.

          Considering how many spams are sent through open relays, which are usually caused by someone (often in east Asia) doing a default install which includes a five-year-old version of Sendmail, or using some broken utility to generate their sendmail.cf file (which can also result in an open relay, since that stuff gets upgraded along with Sendmail), and of which the person running the computer may not even know is running (thanks to the glory days of RedHat turning every inet daemon on by default), the number of broken servers will probably increase at a much higher rate than the servers that get upgraded.

          Every time I go to a used book store, or a thrift store, and see years-old distros of Linux on the shelf, I shudder at the thought of how much 'sploitable stuff is permanently etched into those old CD-ROMs.

          • I think the point is to (1) have a way by which servers can be set to recognize & reject bogus return addresses, and (2) get enough servers running this way so that the ones that don't download the patches can be blocked without major disruptions. Spam aside, if we keep giving equal rights on the net to insecure boxes and outdated server programs, eventually any 10 year old with a DDOS script is going to be able to recruit enough zombies to bring the net down world-wide. So at some point we've got to black-hole those that aren't even making an effort...

            OTOH, I really don't want to rule out anonymous mail entirely. Let's make an exception: false-names get black-holed, but return address = "anonymous.coward" (say) gets passed through the backbone. Individual users can choose whether or not to bounce anonymous mail, and if a server is getting overloaded those may go first.

            The other issue is that there are some legitimate reasons for wanting responses to come back to a different IP address than the sender. So it should be possible for you to convince the server that you do own an alternate return address, and have it accept that as legitimate, or even do the address change for you. But I'm not sure the extra code complexity would be acceptable in all server installations...

  • Hmm (Score:5, Funny)

    by Iamthefallen ( 523816 ) <Gmail name: Iamthefallen> on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @03:36AM (#2808251) Homepage Journal

    Free tip for Mr.Shiffman, I hear TimeCanada are looking for a new webmaster.

    And, I feel that my sig has never been quite so appropriate.

  • SPAM in reverse (Score:2, Interesting)

    by sonicstorm ( 538673 )
    Haha, this is hilarious. Every slashdotter that reads this should send our old pal Bernard a nice e-mail. See how he likes SPAM when he's on the recieving end.

    • At least someone should tell him he's being featured on slashdot and will be known to and remembered by a fair amount of people in the IT biz. I really really wanna see the reply to that :)

    • Or better, call Friday 'sue Bernard Shiffman day'. How many courts can he appear in at once?
    • What exactly would be the use of sending e-mail to a spammer? It's not like he's going to read it, he'll just toss it out like the rest of us...

      But first, he'll do this: The fellow will take your insulting e-mail, find the little address you have attached, and plop it onto as many spam lists as he can find. So, he wakes up in the morning with one insulting letter and the good man gives you 100 messages a day about Free Horny Teens.

      After you, sir...

      - DaftShadow

    • I already did this before I started reading comments but his @home address is already down. Try his consulting address instead:
      bernard@shifmanconsulting.com
      I thanked him for his entertaining read and suggested a more objective course of action... e.g. hide out in the hole you dug your career in to for a while.

  • His Excuse... (Score:5, Funny)

    by tunah ( 530328 ) <sam AT krayup DOT com> on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @03:40AM (#2808257) Homepage
    No, really I was just replying to someone elses spam, but i guess the reply address was the mailing list. Copy of message follows:

    ===
    Date: 2 Jan 03:34:45 GMT
    Subject: Re: Make millions at home!

    Why yes, yes I *would* like to MAKE MONEY FAST!

    Bernard Shit^Hfman.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • It is funny! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by www.sorehands.com ( 142825 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @03:46AM (#2808263) Homepage
    At the bottom of Bernie's website, the people publishing it said:
    nor can the publishers guarantee

    the work of any of the professionals listed here.


    But, the title is misleading, it would seem as though he did not try to file suit, but just threatened. From what I can read, if an attorney did file the attorney would be personally sanctioned under FRCP 11 making a friviolous filing where it could not pass the giggle test.

  • Replying to spammers is fun (Score:5, Funny)

    by Whelkman ( 58482 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @03:51AM (#2808277)
    Once in a while, I'll reply to the solicitors. Of course nine times out of ten it's a bogus email address, but once in a while it actually goes through.

    I got that Nigerian money laundering email twice a day for a week from the same guy before I cut him an email threatening to take a squad of tanks to his contry and turn it into rubble. To my amazement, he actually replied! He (sarcastically, obviously) invited me to attempt to destroy his country.

    I was expecting a DoS flood of Nigerian solicitations (which caused me to learn how to use procmail really fast), but, again, to my amazement, the spams stopped.

    The moral: never underestimate the threat of tanks.

    • Re:Replying to spammers is fun (Score:4, Funny)

      by searleb ( 168974 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @04:50AM (#2808384) Homepage
      I got that Nigerian money laundering email twice a day for a week from the same guy before I cut him an email threatening to take a squad of tanks to his contry and turn it into rubble. To my amazement, he actually replied!

      Last year at the end of semester my roommate was kicking around my office reading e-mail. He recieved the Nigerian money laundering e-mail and, since he was trying to kill time, he looked up the FBI hotline number and phoned in a report of suspicious foreign money launderers. The Feds asked him for his phone number and address, and said that they would investigate it further. We were expecting the FBI to drop by the house to see some of the evidence, but they never did...

      • Re:Replying to spammers is fun (Score:5, Informative)

        by Col. Klink (retired) ( 11632 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @09:55AM (#2809020)
        This is the reply I last received from enforcement@sec.gov:

        Dear Investor:

        Thank you for taking the time to forward to us another instance of advance
        fee frauds. I have fwded. it in turn to the Secret Service at:
        419.fcd@usss.treas.gov.

        Our only request would be that you be kind enough to forward any additional
        iterations of and/or variations on the Nigerian advance fee fraud spam you
        receive directly to the Secret Service. That Federal agency is handling
        this matter, and it would be a great help for you to send them to the Secret
        Service instead of the SEC: 419.fcd@usss.treas.gov.

        Again, thanks for your e-mail.

        Sincerely,

        Jim Daly
        U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission
        Office of Investor Education and Assistance
        (202) 942-7173, (202) 942-9634 (fax)
        oiea@sec.gov

    • Re:Replying to spammers is fun (Score:5, Funny)

      by mpe ( 36238 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @06:41AM (#2808596)
      I got that Nigerian money laundering email twice a day for a week from the same guy before I cut him an email threatening to take a squad of tanks to his contry and turn it into rubble. To my amazement, he actually replied! He (sarcastically, obviously) invited me to attempt to destroy his country.

      What gave it away was your saying "tanks". Had you said "bombers" they might have thought you were serious...

    • Re:Replying to spammers is fun (Score:5, Funny)

      by Erik Fish ( 106896 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @10:50AM (#2809241) Journal

      My favorite reply to the 419 scam (found in the spamcop.geeks group on the spamcop.net news server):

      Subject: Re: Nigerian Scam ressurected
      Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 09:21:03 -0500
      From: "ISSA GIDADA" <IssaGidada@yahoo.com>

      Dear DR.ONORIODE BOBOLO,

      It is so good to hear from a fellow-countryman, having been raised and lived for many years in our most beautiful homeland, Nigeria. I want to send you my sincere thanks and gratitude for your kind offer of USD$25,000.000.00 (TWENTY FIVE MILLION UNITED STATE DOLLARS) for taking part in this funds transfer transaction.

      However, I am a businessman too, and I make my living transferring large sums of money from and to my friends, relatives, and business associates in Nigeria. Therefore, I know that you would agree, that in order to participate in this wonderful opportunity, I must have an advance monetary commitment from you -- a good faith gesture on your part -- in order to proceed.

      Therefore, I ask that you deposit just 10% ($2,500,000) of the $25M into my PayPal account as an indication that you truly possess the funds and are actually authorized to release them. Using the online PayPal service is a very convenient and secure way to transfer funds. All you need do is access the PayPal web site -- http://www.paypal.com -- open a PayPal account, deposit the funds into your new account, and then transfer the money into my existing account, which has already been set up to receive the $25M.

      You only need my email address, which you already have, to transfer the funds into my account. Therefore, the complete safety of your account, as well as mine, is guaranteed and insured unconditionally. You have asked that this matter be handled with the strictest confidentiality, and I will agree to that condition, provided that the transfer takes place in a reasonable period of time, say by Friday, 5 October.

      If the money has not been received by that time, I must assume that you are not making a legitimate offer, and that you might be someone other than who you say you are -- although I can tell by the exceptional language of your email, that is probably not the case. However, if that is the case, then I will be forced to embark upon a most unpleasant course of action that I would prefer not to undertake.

      Because I have so many loyal friends in the Government of Nigeria and the Military, and many close ties within the Security Service where you work, it would be quite easy to locate your office and your home, as well as learn the identities of your friends and relatives.

      I truly don't believe that you would want to jeopardize their health and well-being, and your own future. I will access my PayPal account on next Saturday to verify that your good-faith payment has been made. Once that takes place, we can move forward with the final transfer.

      I trust that you will not disappoint me in this matter, since the consequences for non-compliance could be quite severe. I look forward with great anticipation to working with you.

      Yours faithfully,


      Issa Gidada, JD, MMB,
      President & CEO
      U.S./Nigeria Funds Transfer Organization
      Beverly Hills, CA

  • Honestly, is this really that uncommon? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ebbomega ( 410207 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @03:51AM (#2808280) Journal
    I'm still waiting for a subpoena from back in December 99 from some guy threatening to sue some people on alt.cult-movies.rocky-horror for "slander" (guy claimed to be a software patent lawyer and didn't even know the difference between "slander" and "libel"... it was classic) because we made him lose money on e-bay, as we pointed out that his so called "Super Rare" (which, since then, has become blaspheme on the Rocky Horror newsgroup... but mostly because me and a Frank-N-Furter from Vegas spammed the board one night with a plethora of jokes about "Suck my super-rare schlong" and the like...) Rocky Horror Dolls he was selling on e-bay for $80 were available at your local Spencer's gifts for about $16....

    This is just another case of someone threatening with lawsuits when they're really just full of chicken$#!+. Come on. Who here hasn't been threatened with legal action by some moron online?

    I still say the coolest part of that whole flame war (which, btw, lasted a good month) was that he kept giving us phone numbers for the Pittsburg department of investigations (being that I'm Canadian, it would've been quite impressive that someone whose jurisdiction I'm not even in the same country as would be investigating me) saying that it was his proof that he was going to see us in court. And then he called us evil viscious [sic] morons.

    "Come to think of it, there already are a million monkeys at a million typewriters, and usenet is _NOTHING_ like Shakespeare." - Blair Houghton.

  • Why hasn't SpamCop been mentioned? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Tsar ( 536185 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @03:58AM (#2808287) Homepage Journal
    I'd have thought that someone would have brought up SpamCop [spamcop.net] by now. Is there a better service that I don't know about?

    Anytime I get a spam, I hit the link that I received when I registered with SpamCop, and paste the email (complete with header) into the provided textbox. SpamCop processes the email, compiles a report of the offending spam, computes the appropriate reporting addresses, and delivers a copy to each one.

    It even allows you to add text to the beginning of the report. I always add this:
    The electronic mail message referenced in this report was transmitted to a user or users of an electronic mail service based in the state of Tennessee, USA, in direct violation of Tennessee Code Title 47, Chapter 18, Part 25: "Unsolicited Advertising by Electronic Means." See http://www.spamlaws.com/state/tn.html [spamlaws.com] for the complete text of this law.
    Does that make me a bad person?

    --
    Tsar's Hypothesis: As the population of the Earth increases, the sum of human intelligence remains constant.

    • Re:Why hasn't SpamCop been mentioned? (Score:4, Informative)

      by vandan ( 151516 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @04:12AM (#2808318) Homepage
      Yes SpamCop is good.
      I can testify that they actually do make a difference because I was threatened with legal action myself after reporting a local (Australian) marketing company to spamcop. Apparently they lost their account with their ISP.
      I got a phonecall from an idiot who started threatening me with a lawsuit to recover 'great financial hardship' or some crap. It was a very abusive conversation. So then I rang the Australian Direct Marketing Association and told a girl there my story, put together a formal complaint. I haven't heard anything since (this was probably 3-5 months ago now).
      So anyway the point is that SpamCop works & work GOOD!

      • Re:Why hasn't SpamCop been mentioned? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by RFC959 ( 121594 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @11:54AM (#2809619) Journal
        Now the dissenting point of view: I've been on the other side of SpamCop too many times, because there are too many people out there with an overdeveloped sense of anti-spam righteousness and an underdeveloped sense of clue. I worked for a company that maintained a number of mailing lists - which I know were strictly opt-in - and every time we sent out a mailing, we'd get back at least one incoherent "STOP SMPAMMING ME YUO BATARDS I WILL SUE YOUR FOR ONE MILLION DOLARS" and a bunch of SpamCop reports. So we ended up with a SpamCop report as long as your arm, through no fault of our own. (We even got in a bit of trouble with Jon Orwant and O'Reilly one time! That was more a case of the interaction of a couple different things having an unexpected result than the typical spam-like mail, though, and Orwant and the O'Reilly guys were pretty cool about it once they realized we were actual human beings trying to DTRT. OK, gratuitous name-dropping over.)

        I have to admit that we didn't make things all that easy for the subscribers - we only sent out mailings every few months, so it was easy for people to forget they'd subscribed, and the business people were always changing the names of the lists, and merging the lists, and splitting the lists, so it was easy for people to get confused about what exactly they were receiving. Still, it was an eye-opener to be on the other side of the fence.

        SpamCop isn't the problem itself - the idea is good - but let's face it: Internet users are largely the same users who call their monitor the computer and their computer the hard drive, or think you can get the Internet on CDROM, or click on any attachment they get. Do you really think they're going to be capable of using a tool like SpamCop properly?

        So, a couple tips (which I wish I could send to the Internet population as a whole, since the /. types need it less than others):
        -Read the whole message. If you don't recognize it, make sure it didn't just change its name or merge with another list or something.
        -Check to see if it has unsubscribe instructions. Yes, I know, every spam these days says "mail jessica12345@hotmail.com to unsubscribe!", but if you get a message from "newsletter@example.com" that says "You are receiving this message because you subscribed to the Foo Newsletter at http://www.example.com/subscribe; to unsubscribe, simply forward this message to unsubscribe@example.com; if you have a question or a problem, please contact us at newsletter@example.com" - then it's probably real and MAYBE YOU SHOULD TRY ACTUALLY FOLLOWING THE INSTRUCTIONS. (Instead of just picking an email address at random from the mailing and demanding to be unsubscribed!)
        -Don't start swearing at people and making threats right off the bat. If the sender is legit, there will be a real human reading your mail, and pissing him off is probably not a good way to get stuff done. If you've already tried to unsubscribe and it hasn't worked, consider the possibility that there was a technical glitch, and maybe the sender isn't just trying to piss you off. (I was amused to notice a certain correlation between the number of swear words the angry recipient used and his (claimed) rank in his organization. If the email began "Fuck you, you cocksucking spammers...", it was a pretty good bet it would end "...Joe Johnson, CEO, MegaSite.Com")

        • You could always reply to the spamcop report and show the recipient the e-mail they sent when they went through your confirmed opt-in procedure. Unfortunately many marketers don't use confirmed opt-in, which opens you and your customers to a lot of misunderstanding. If you can prove to someone (complainant, or your ISP) when they subscribed to your newsletter you'll save yourself some grief.

          Changing the names of newsletters / businesses will also get you complaints. Say your company made widgets, and I as a consumer of widgets subscribed to your "Widget news and deals" newsletter. The widget biz turns sour and you get eaten up by a sprocket company. Now I receive "Sprocket Center" every day and I'm left wondering when I subscribed to it.

          Last, the vast majority of "corporate / mainsleaze" spam I get is just that, spam. Let's say I signed up for some service that was giving out free money back in the .com hey days.. I specifically told them I didn't want any e-mail. The company goes bust, my e-mail address gets bought and sold a few times, and someone's database conversion 'forgets' that I unchecked the 'spam me' box. It happens. If your company bought "opt-in" e-mail addresses to put on your list, it's likely your list is dirty.
        • The right thing to do is double-opt-in. I've received a good share of spam mails claiming that I've at one time subscribed to a service or a list. This is almost always complete bullshit. I am tracking subscriptions and the address on which these mails appear hasn't been used to subscribe to anything for years. Also, don't join, split or rename lists without notifying all recipients of the change and don't blame it on "business people" if you don't keep the recipients up-to-date about their subscription status. You probably didn't do this, but just in case: Don't sell lists to other entities at all. Such a move should always require the users to resubscribe.

  • Oh My God (Score:5, Funny)

    by Rinikusu ( 28164 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @03:59AM (#2808288)
    Jesus Christ. I just wasted 30 minutes of my life reading through that whole mess. I want those 30 minutes back!

    Do I have such a miserable life that I'm willing to spend that much time on something that affects me in no way whatsoever AND the few minutes it takes to post about it on /.????

    Man. I need to get back to work.

  • Slashdot THIS link and cost spammers $$$ (Score:4, Informative)

    by vandan ( 151516 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @04:03AM (#2808299) Homepage
    Click here [overture.com] and then each link on the page and the advertisers gets charged the amount shown in small print. But for a permanent solution: I want to charge people who send me email. I would obviously pay back all those people who send stuff I wanted to see, and not pay back those who pissed me off. What's the chance of this happening? It would be good.

    • ... I want to charge people who send me email. I would obviously pay back all those people who send stuff I wanted to see, and not pay back those who pissed me off. What's the chance of this happening? It would be good.


      Well, it's possible to refuse email that doesn't have a special (usable only once) password, and charge for the passwords. This is something you could (theoretically) set up right now using paypal, procmail, and a custom web site. Since it's possible, and it's been posted to slashdot, I'd guess the odds at about even money.

    • The correct link is... (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Here [overture.com]

  • This is funny stuff! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Bombcar ( 16057 )
    We should perhaps look more into spammer-baiting! Anyone in Chicago able to get a personal interview with Bernie?

    Now he's Slashdot Famous! He'll probably advertise that he's a Slashdot Expert!
  • There's nothing more astonishing and frustrating than when spammers try to attack back. I've been trying to stop some kind of "sex news" newsletter that's followed me from email to email address for the last three years (I suspect they are just spamming Thai-based email in general).

    I get angry responses from them each time I report them for spamming. They say that I am engaged in "extortion" against them (?) and complain to my ISP and SpamCop. Nothing's ever come of it, but every 3 or 4 months I can count on a fresh newsletter and another round of invective.

  • Funniest quote ever (Score:5, Funny)

    by tunah ( 530328 ) <sam AT krayup DOT com> on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @04:16AM (#2808325) Homepage
    How much more helpful could I be than to provide you with the appropriate e-mail address? I could engrave it on a clue-by-four and deliver it to you in Chicago, I suppose.

    Funniest thing i've read in a long time. Like my new sig?

    • Re:Funniest quote ever (Score:5, Funny)

      by vladkrupin ( 44145 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @05:39AM (#2808471) Homepage
      No, that's not that funny. The real kicker is the attorney representing Bernie Shifman (quoted from spambag.net):

      Bernie Shifman left another voice mail message for me today (this time entirely in English) informing me that he's taking me court, represented by the law firm of "Tupoy, Durak, and Bolvan", Attorneys At Law.

      For those poor non-Russian speakers... 'Tupoy', 'Durak', and 'Bolvan' are the three synonyms translated into English as 'idiot'! I bet the guy owns that law firm too!

      Yes, I am hoping for an extra karma point for 'Funny' or maybe even 'Informative'. Karma is good. But even without it it's nice to share the fun with the 99% poor /.'ers souls who are illiterate in Russian.

  • Congratulations, you're front page news!

    (On Slashdot.org, though)
  • I am sure CmdrTaco is going to start getting threating emails from Shifman tomorrow claiming he is going to sue Slashdot for linking to the petemoss webpage. And soon, all who post in this thread will get a email too... (Do you think he can decipher those tough email scrambling schemes /. uses ... better alert my lawyers to be ready :-)

    This whole thing just makes me sad that I am from same town as Shifman. And what kind of dumb "computer consultant" can't even use whois info to track down someone's address? It took me a whole 3 minutes to track down Neil Schwartzman's address.
  • but I guess the poster was to scared of Bernard thinking he/she was going to get sued and posted it anonymously :-)

    What? Someone had to say it :-)

  • Shifman spam and sue services (Score:5, Funny)

    by arvindn ( 542080 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @04:25AM (#2808343) Homepage Journal

    Hi. I'm Bernard Shit^Hfman, and I do computer consultancy services. I'm looking for contract work. I specialize in spam and sue services: I offer advice on how to spam, and then sue for damages. So any time you want to make some money, you can use my phone number as a starting point.
    P.S If you don't get back to me within a month, you'll be liable for damages resulting from my going out of work. My lawyers will be getting in touch with you and you could be facing upto $1500 a day
    P.P.S wanna fuck me?

  • I wonder... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Night0wl ( 251522 )
    What the odds are of this resulting in a suicide...

    If he does take this too seriously, as it seems he does. The odds of him getting employed with-out redicule in any tech savvy computer industry are greatly reduced.

    All it will take is one slashdot reader/appropriate internet surfer with a decent memory to recall his name and make mention of it.

    We've effectively killed his internet persona.
    Name change maybe? heh.
  • Do you suppose that Bernard Shifman is related to John "Doctor of Law" Grubor [telebyte.com]?

  • Reminds me of a hoax (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mirko ( 198274 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @04:52AM (#2808391) Journal
    French Slashdotters may have heard about David Hirschmann [hoaxbuster.com]. In short (if you don't like Fish [altavista.com]) David Hirschmann was supposed to have some misconception of the corporate world which he shared with one of his female co-workers an inapropriate way. She then would have forwarded it around the Internet and at the end DH may have comitted suicide.
    This got covered quite a lot by the French Press but finally appeared to be a hoax as no one of these protagonists actualy existed.
    Now in this case I'd also tend to think that it may not be real...
    I don't know people as stupid as this b.shifman that would have an internet connection.
    There's something extreme here. it smells like comedy...

  • US Mailing Address (Score:4, Funny)

    by 0xA ( 71424 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @04:55AM (#2808397)
    There are serveral references on the site about Bernie trying to get a U.S. Mail address from Schwatrzman. I assume he would like to send him a registered letter via the US Postal Service.

    Too bad Neil didn't give it to him. The email Bernie sent was to an alcor.concordia.ca address.

    Concordia is a University.... in Montreal....

  • This is funny, I got his resume also. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rawg ( 23000 ) <phill@kenoyer. c o m> on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @06:21AM (#2808547) Homepage
    I have his resume in my mail archives also.

    From bshifman@ameritech.net Tue Dec 18 05:47:40 2001

    Its to a personal email address that I never use at all for the past few years.

  • Ebay (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Beowulf_Boy ( 239340 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @06:47AM (#2808607)
    I've had the same thing happen on ebay before.
    I found some guy trying to sell a CD with a bunch of GPL'd programs. Clearly visible in the screenshots where The Gimp, Staroffice, and Abiword. He claimed his company, something like
    Blah industries, created the programs themselves.
    I wrote him an email and let him know that if he didn't change the ad, he would be in violation of the GPL.
    HE THREATENED TO SUE ME FOR HARRASMENT!!
    He actually had his lawyer email me (yes, it was his lawyer, the email address was from a business and I went to the website and looked).
    I wrote the lawyer back, told him what the man was doing, and never got a reply back.
    I really wish I would have saved those emails, but I have switched services and computers since.

  • Careful now (Score:3, Informative)

    by Rogerborg ( 306625 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @07:07AM (#2808653) Homepage

    Editors and posters, please take care: we're talking about Bernard Shifman (single 'f'), not any of the Bernard Shiffman's (double 'ff') out there.

    As Mr Shifman seems to be highly irrascible, it's probably as well to at least get his name correct.

  • DOH! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Minupla ( 62455 ) <minupla@noSpaM.gmail.com> on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @07:10AM (#2808658) Homepage Journal
    You know you're having a bad day when the site trying to lambaste you gets listed on /.

    You know you're having a worse day when the site refuses to crash under the /. effect!

  • They picked on this guy... (Score:3, Troll)

    by bjtuna ( 70129 ) <brian@@@intercarve...net> on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @08:20AM (#2808754) Homepage
    I can feel the mod-downs coming, but I feel this has to be said. I think these anti-spam zealots teamed up on this poor spammer, and the only reason it went as far as it did (and as hilariously as it did) was because Shifman has a large amount of juvenile pride.

    First off, it should be noted that almost all the players in this little cast (except for Shifman) are members of anti-spam Usenet groups. Do a Google Groups search for "Joe Greco", who claimed to receive one of Bernard's emails, and you'll get some not-so-nice reports of Joe's behavior:
    http://groups.google.com/groups?q=joe+greco&meta= [google.com]. Laura Atkins, who claimed her company received a spam from Bernard, also weighed in on the whole thing. Laura's company, Blighty.com is a privacy consulting firm: people hire her to find out who spammers are. Laura's name shows up in various anti-spam newsgroups also, including the one that Joe Greco & Bill Carton post in. In this thread [google.com], you can see this for yourself.
    In fact, it appears that Joe, Bill, Neil, Laura, and her husband Steve are all active posters on news.admin.net-abuse.email

    I believe everyone needs a hobby, and these anti-spam people are no exception. I hate spam as much as the next guy, but I think these people see themselves as anti-spam vigilantes. Most of the time, it's okay because they're doing some good (since spam DOES suck). In this case, it appears that while Bernard's emails were sent in bulk, they were not sent to random emails. He seemed to have made an honest attempt to ensure that only HR Departments receieved his mail. In some cases, he messed up and targeted the wrong people. Since he's trying to find jobs with computer companies, it's not uncommon to send HR requests to a non-HR department; after all, many small computer companies don't HAVE an HR department, but just an admin running the whole show.

    I receive a lot of spam, but most of it is for breast-enlargement pills or Make-Money-Fast schemes. If I got an email like Bernard's, I would assume:
    1) he probably sent this to companys other than mine
    2) he probably found my company on the web, by hand, which is why he knew we were a computer company. If we sold sofas, I wouldn't have gotten the mail.

    Thus, the emails were bulk and they were unsolicited, but they were sent to addresses posted on the websites of the target companies STRICTLY for the purpose of receiving job requests and resumes.

    I think Neil overreacted, and his anti-spam bully friends took over. These guys cover for each other, and pick on the alleged spammers as a team.


    • I think these anti-spam zealots teamed up on this poor spammer, and the only reason it went as far as it did (and as hilariously as it did) was because Shifman has a large amount of juvenile pride.



      A couple of things:



      1. I am the spambag.net guy.



      2. In my experience, people who use the term 'anti-spam zealots' are either spambags themselves, of members of the mainsleaze spam lobby, (i.e. Ken Magill of the Direct Marketing Associations, or various random clueless marketdroids who occasionally write for mainstream rags).



      3. The reason Shifman was piled on was because he deserved it. Nobody cared about him much until he began calling people up on the phone, yelling at them, or leaving crank messages on the answering machine. The initial version of spambag.net was only a few short paragraphs. Then Shifman began calling my voice mail and screaming into my answering machine.



      Here's a free clue to wanna-be grubors and speedbumps. Be very careful before you decide to waive your dick around. Someone might just have a bigger one themselves.

      • 2. In my experience, people who use the term 'anti-spam zealots' are either spambags themselves, of members of the
        mainsleaze spam lobby, (i.e. Ken Magill of the Direct Marketing Associations, or various random clueless marketdroids who
        occasionally write for mainstream rags).

        I don't think I deserved that.
        [Insert the whole "i'm not a spammer or anything else you just called me" rant here].
      • In my experience, people who use the term 'anti-spam zealots' are either spambags themselves, of members of the mainsleaze spam lobby, (i.e. Ken Magill of the Direct Marketing Associations, or various random clueless marketdroids who occasionally write for mainstream rags).
        That's harsh, man. The guy just presented an alternative viewpoint to this whole case - one which he obviously researched and which tells a story many people reading about the Shifman case probably don't know about - and you call him spambag, sleaze, or clueless. And then you wonder why he uses a term like 'anti-spam zealot'... Sheesh. Look, I hate spam as much as the next guy, and Shifman obviously is at fault here, but-- dammit, did it really take four of you to poke through the bars of this rabid dog's cage? I think that question is actually quite legitimate.
      • > In my experience, people who use the term 'anti-spam zealots' are
        > either spambags themselves, of members of the mainsleaze spam lobby,
        > (i.e. Ken Magill of the Direct Marketing Associations, or various
        > random clueless marketdroids who occasionally write for mainstream
        > rags).

        Bah. By this logic, anyone advocating due process for suspicious immigrants is a terrorist, and the HUAC's victims must really have been Stalin's spies after all. Sounds like zealotry to me.

    • Oh, come on! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Otto ( 17870 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @09:22AM (#2808922) Homepage Journal
      From the read it seems readily appearant that their only "provocative" actions were to forward a complaint to the postmaster addresses of whatever ISP Bernie was using at the time. From there this little shithead goes ballistic, threatens legal action, calls people names and generally harasses them. The guy is a moron and deserves every bit of it. Okay, so they don't let up when it becomes obvious that Bernie's full of shit, but big deal..

      I personally think the only appropriate response left is just to have him whacked and be done with it (hey, I know some people in Chicago, you know?)... ;-)

    • Re:They picked on this guy... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by CaptainSuperBoy ( 17170 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @10:25AM (#2809135) Homepage Journal
      I believe everyone needs a hobby, and these anti-spam people are no exception

      For many it's no hobby. Some are sysadmins, network admins, abuse staff. This is their job, and their systems are being abused by thieves. By organizing against spammers they are doing a service to the entire Internet community and they should be commended, not called 'vigilantes.'

      When you describe any group (anti-spam, linux users, bow hunters) as 'these people' it tends to set them off too.

      He seemed to have made an honest attempt to ensure that only HR Departments receieved his mail.

      Still spam. After he made his 'honest' attempt to target his spam, he made another 'honest' attempt to harass people who reported him to his ISP. What are you saying they did wrong? Should they have not reported him?

      Hey, at least you didn't say "just hit delete" anywhere in your post..
    • Buzzzz.....

      I am not affiliated with the anti-spam community! Just a bass player in a band who got his resume and chuckled about it to what used to be 20 some odd people who knew my site existed. Google grabbed it... and the rest is history. Where did he get my address from? I am surely not a company!
      • the emails were bulk and they were unsolicited, but they were sent to addresses posted on the websites of the target companies STRICTLY for the purpose of receiving job requests and resumes

      Which is where your apology (in the sense of explanation) falls apart. The original email was not sent to a posted address of a target company, it was a badly targetted unsolicited commercial communication.

      From the recipient's point of view, badly targetted and untargetted look exactly the same. Without further communication, there's no way to tell, and further communication these days generally means you disclosing that your address is active, which just solitics more spam. Also, most spammers these days slather their dross in laughable disclaimers like "This is not unsolicited email" or faux-intimate personalisation, and there's nothing in Shifman's original solicitation (sent from an @home address rather than his own domain) to mark it as being badly targetted through ignorance rather than untargetted through malice.

      Sad to say, there's now only one sensible response to receiving any piece of UCE, from any sender. Refer it to the sender's upstream provider, and let them deal with it. If the sender has made one - or a couple - of innocent mistakes, they should have no problem convincing their provider of that, right?

      What's most telling is Shifman's response to the initial and impersonal complaint. He took it as a personal and malicious attack, which indicates either that he doesn't understand why Bill interpreted his email as untargetted (rather than badly targetted), or that he simply thinks that there's nothing inherently wrong with untargetted UCE. A simple, "Sorry, my bad, targetting error" would have sorted the whole thing out.

      Note that by the time Bill's chums leapt it to join the Shifman taunting, he had already dug his own grave with his ignorance and belligerency. Cruel as it is, it is undeniably funny to read his frenzied frothings.

  • How NOT to get a job (Score:3, Funny)

    by markmoss ( 301064 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @08:40AM (#2808794)
    1) Send an unsolicited resume _everywhere_, not just to places you have researched and have some reason to think you might have a chance at...
    2) When they ask you to stop sending resumes, respond with foul language and threats of lawsuit.

    And this idiot did it repeatedly!

    Really, even McDonald's won't hire you if they are aware of a history like that.
    • 1) Send an unsolicited resume _everywhere_, not just to places you have researched and have some reason to think you might have a chance at...

      <gulp>

      killall spam_monster_dot_com.pl

  • We need anti-spam measures NOW! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Mustang Matt ( 133426 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @09:06AM (#2808866)
    I know there are a lot of you that think spam is no big deal, but for those of us that are dealing with a lot of domains and a lot of email addresses, it is getting unbearable. Yes, I can filter 99% of it, but geez, it is REALLY becoming a waste of my bandwidth even if I throw out my time wasted. Bandwidth = Money.

    Missouri's new anti-spam legislation should go into effect with the next couple of weeks but it's not going to be effective without more states getting involved.

    For those of you that care, write or email your local representatives and ask what anti-spam measures are in place and what can be done to get more if yours aren't effective. Tell them about the Washington law and it's effectiveness.

    At a bare minimum, another thing I would like to see is a federal law that allowed every domain to have some email address (maybe postmaster) that it would be illegal to send spam to. This address would be strictly used for individuals needing to contact the administrator of a machine or domain. Imagine that...

    Do any of you know how to trace down these 800 number companies that are sending spam off servers from overseas? Server admin's overseas either can't read my english requests or don't give a crap about spam coming from their servers. I've actually started calling the 800 numbers leaving valid contact information in hopes that they'll call me and I can rip someone's head off for two seconds. Amazingly enough, I haven't even gotten any responses!!!

    I think I even got a fraudulent spam the other day. This "company" was claiming to be a non-profit child abuse organization. I'm almost sure they weren't and they were simply suckering money out of people. I tried to report it to both the real company and the FCC but I don't know if I got to the right people or not.

    Are there any groups that are actively standing out against spam and lobbying the politicians? If so, I'm ready to join, if not, I need to start one.
    • Are there any groups that are actively standing out against spam and lobbying the politicians? If so, I'm ready to join, if not, I need to start one.

      CAUCE [cauce.org] (Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email)

      They have links from their home page to related regional organisations, including EuroCAUCE [cauce.org] (European branch)

  • My question is... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Guppy06 ( 410832 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @09:55AM (#2809019)
    Has anybody gone through his resume and attempted to contact his (supposed) former employers to hear what they have to say about him, if anything? Did he really work for who he said he did? Is he committing fraud?

  • What does Bill have to prove? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rogerborg ( 306625 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @11:08AM (#2809344) Homepage

    I recall an online altercation that I had a few years back. A post appeared in one of the UK ISP groups advertising a "too good to be true" service. This was at the time when narrowband access was going nuts in the UK, with companies taking a year's money off of people, then going bust the next day.

    As a warning to the terminally gullible, I posted the whois info for the domain, and noted that it didn't match the trading address on the website.

    A few hours later I received a vicious email from the poster threatening legal action because I had posted his home address on the group, when he was only the admin for the site, and threatening to post my home details all over the place.

    Well, fuck me sideways, I thought, and let loose with a tirade about how anyone could possibly call themselves an admin when they didn't even understand that whois records are public - which mine were, and so I couldn't give a damn about what he did with them.

    Two minutes after I sent it, I thought... wait a minute. There's a real human being receiving this.

    And so I hammered out an apology, a genuine and heartfelt and sincere apology. Oh, I didn't mean a word of it, of course. The guy had screwed up, and was too stubborn to admit it. But I screw up every day, and don't like having it pointed out, and it was simply cruel to heap any further misery on this poster.

    So I apologised for posting his address, and he replied in a calmer manner, and we had a chat, and he turned out to be a decent (if slightly clueless) bloke. He declined my offer to post a public apology on the group. I would have had no qualms about doing so, because knowing that I was absolutely in the right meant that I really didn't have anything to prove, and that my priority was to reduce the amount of human suffering in the world (in a small way, but every little helps, right?).

    It's a shame that Bill didn't take the opportunity to defuse this situation. It's so obvious that Shifman is in the wrong that it really doesn't need to be laboured. He's clearly not very bright, and so it's rather cruel (funny, yes, but cruel) to taunt him so. I'm sure that Bill could just send a without-prejudice apology and walk away from this, and we'd understand that he's doing it from kindness and generosity, to dig Shifman out of the hole that he's dug for himself.

    The fact that Bill doesn't do this, and that he's taking care to avoid actionable statements even though he claims that Shifman has no case rather implies that Bill isn't entirely confident that he's in the right here. And that's a shame, because he could end this with one brave and courteous gesture, for pity's sake, and out of strength, not weakness.

  • What to do with your SPAM. (Score:3, Funny)

    by mencik ( 516959 ) <steve@mencik.com> on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @11:09AM (#2809351) Homepage
    I like to save the SPAM that I get from the people that want to tell me how to make millions, and then forward it to the SPAMmers that are supposedly representing charities and are asking for money. I figure I should cut out the middle-man and just let these "charities" make the millions for themselves!

  • How many messages did Mr. Shifman send? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Some Dumbass... ( 192298 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @12:04PM (#2809685)
    The thing that bothers me about this is that I don't see anyone saying how many e-mails Mr. Shifman sent out. The original message posted on this site has one name in the "To:" line, and no mention of a "CC:" line. That suggests that it was sent to exactly one person. My question is, did Mr. Schwartzman know that Mr Shifman was sending out multiple e-mails when he made his complaint to Mr. Shifman's ISP. If so, how did he know? (I know that he found out later on when other people got involved, but at the time that he registered his complaint, how did he know?) From the page itself, it looks like Mr. Schwartzman got a single email (one sent to an inappropriate address, true) and got the sender's e-mail account cancelled. Is there more to the story? Because if not, it sounds like Mr. Schwartzman was in the wrong. Sending out one e-mail to the wrong person is annoying, but it's not spam.

  • Insult as an art form... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Da VinMan ( 7669 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @12:33PM (#2809894)
    I am humbled by the mastery demonstrated here. ;+)

    And I quote:

    YEAH, BUT HOW DO YOU REALLY FEEL?

    Matt from The Culprits' Open Letter to Spammers

    From: "Matt Hiltner"
    To: "'Neil Schwartzman'"
    Subject: Open letter to spammers
    Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 00:57:00 -0600

    Mr. Spammer, you swine. You vulgar little maggot. You worthless bag of filth. As they say in Texas. I'll bet you couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions on the heel. You are a canker. A sore that won't go away. I would rather kiss a lawyer than be seen with you.

    You're a putrescent mass, a walking vomit. You are a spineless little worm deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. You are a jerk, a cad, a weasel. Your life is a monument to stupidity. You are a stench, a revulsion, a big suck on a sour lemon.

    You are a bleating foal, a curdled staggering mutant dwarf smeared richly with the effluvia and offal accompanying your alleged birth into this world. An insensate, blinking calf, meaningful to nobody, abandoned by the puke-drooling, giggling beasts who sired you and then killed themselves in recognition of what they had done.

    I will never get over the embarrassment of belonging to the same species as you. You are a monster, an ogre, a malformity. I barf at the very thought of you. You have all the appeal of a paper cut. Lepers avoid you. You are vile, worthless, less than nothing. You are a weed, a fungus, the dregs of this earth. And did I mention you smell?

    Try to edit your responses of unnecessary material before attempting to impress us with your insight. The evidence that you are a nincompoop will still be available to readers, but they will be able to access it more rapidly.

    You snail-skulled little rabbit. Would that a hawk pick you up, drive its beak into your brain, and upon finding it rancid set you loose to fly briefly before spattering the ocean rocks with the frothy pink shame of your ignoble blood. May you choke on the queasy, convulsing nausea of your own trite, foolish beliefs.

    You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable. You are grimy, squalid, nasty and profane. You are foul and disgusting. You're a fool, an ignoramus. Monkeys look down on you. Even sheep won't have sex with you. You are unreservedly pathetic, starved for attention, and lost in a land that reality forgot.

    And what meaning do you expect your delusionally self-important statements of unknowing, inexperienced opinion to have with us? What fantasy do you hold that you would believe that your tiny-fisted tantrums would have more weight than that of a leprous desert rat, spinning rabidly in a circle, waiting for the bite of the snake? You are a waste of flesh. You have no rhythm. You are ridiculous and obnoxious. You are the moral equivalent of a leech. You are a living emptiness, a meaningless void. You are sour and senile. You are a disease, you puerile one-handed slack-jawed drooling meatslapper.

    On a good day you're a half-wit. You remind me of drool. You are deficient in all that lends character. You have the personality of wallpaper. You are dank and filthy. You are asinine and benighted. You are the source of all unpleasantness. You spread misery and sorrow wherever you go.

    You smarmy lagerlout git. You bloody woofter sod. Bugger off, pillock. You grotty wanking oik artless base-court apple-john. You clouted boggish foot-licking twit. You dankish clack-dish plonker. You gormless crook-pated tosser. You churlish boil-brained clotpole ponce. You cockered bum-bailey poofter. You craven dewberry pisshead cockup pratting naff. You gob-kissing gleeking flap-mouthed coxcomb. You dread-bolted fobbing beef-witted clapper-clawed flirt-gill.

    You are a fiend and a coward, and you have bad breath. You are degenerate, noxious and depraved. I feel debased just for knowing you exist. I despise everything about you, and I wish you would go away. I cannot believe how incredibly stupid you are. I mean rock-hard stupid. Dehydrated-rock-hard stupid. Stupid so stupid that it goes way beyond the stupid we know into a whole different dimension of stupid. You are trans-stupid stupid. Meta-stupid. Stupid collapsed on itself so far that even the neutrons have collapsed. Stupid gotten so dense that no intellect can escape. Singularity stupid. Blazing hot mid-day sun on Mercury stupid. You emit more stupid in one second than our entire galaxy emits in a year. Quasar stupid. Your writing has to be a troll. Nothing in our universe can really be this stupid. Perhaps this is some primordial fragment from the original big bang of stupid. Some pure essence of a stupid so uncontaminated by anything else as to be beyond the laws of physics that we know. I'm sorry. I can't go on. This is an epiphany of stupid for me. After this, you my not hear from me again for a while. I don't have enough strength left to deride your ignorant questions and half baked comments about unimportant trivia, or any of the rest of this drivel. Duh.

    The only thing worse than your logic is your manners. Maybe later in life, after you have learned to read, write, spell, and count, you will have more success. True, these are rudimentary skills that many of us "normal" people take for granted that everyone has an easy time of mastering. But we sometimes forget that there are "challenged" persons in this world who find these things more difficult. If I had known, that this was your case then I would have never read your post. It just wouldn't have been "right". Sort of like parking in a handicap space. I wish you the best of luck in the emotional, and social struggles that seem to be placing such a demand on you.

    P.S.

    You are hypocritical, greedy, violent, malevolent, vengeful, cowardly, deadly, mendacious, meretricious, loathsome, despicable, belligerent, opportunistic, barratrous, contemptible, criminal, fascistic, bigoted, racist, sexist, avaricious, tasteless, idiotic, brain-damaged, imbecilic, insane, arrogant, deceitful, demented, lame, self-righteous, byzantine,conspiratorial, satanic, fraudulent, libelous, bilious, splenetic, spastic, ignorant, clueless, illegitimate, harmful, destructive, dumb, evasive, double-talking, devious, revisionist, narrow, manipulative, paternalistic, fundamentalist, dogmatic, idolatrous, unethical, cultic, diseased, suppressive, controlling, restrictive, malignant, deceptive, dim, crazy, weird, dystopic, stifling, uncaring, plantigrade, grim, unsympathetic, jargon-spouting, censorious, secretive, aggressive, mind-numbing, arassive, poisonous, flagrant, self-destructive, abusive, socially-retarded, puerile, clueless, and generally Not Good.

    In other words, go away.

  • A spoonful of research... (Score:4, Informative)

    by CyberLife ( 63954 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @12:38PM (#2809922)
    I took the liberty to do a little bit of research on good 'ol Bernie. Here's what I found:
    • The address listed on his domain registration is over four miles from city hall (source: MapQuest.com). Granted I know nothing about Chicago's layout, but I would assume this is not in the high-rise district.

    • There are no less than nine schools and nine supermarkets within the immediate vicinity of his location (source: MapQuest.com).

    • In his block alone there are 164 housing units of which nearly 50% are single occupant dwellings. In addition, nearly half of the housing in that same block are rentals. (source for both: US Census for 2000)

    • Again, his block alone is only about 1/4 of a mile long (source: US Census for 2000).
    Now, the "suite" number listed on his domain registration is in the 400's, implying it's on the fourth floor. The fact that there even exists a unit number in the address proves it's a multi-occupant building. Taking into consideration all of the above information along with the type of work he claims to do, it's my opinion (possibly incorrect) the address listed in his domain records is most likely a single-family apartment.

    I seriously doubt his claims of the greatness of his career. He's probably just some wannabe compulsive liar who screwed up and refuses to bow out gracefully.

    BTW, I'm not infallible (wait a minute, yes I am) so I would appreciate others checking my figures. :)

  • Shifman's not suing anyone (Score:3, Informative)

    by tgeller ( 10260 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @12:52PM (#2810011) Homepage
    Folks, take a look at this. Mr. Shifman hasn't sued anyone for responding to his spam, and I'll wager he never will. He's made baseless threats, referring to non-existent lawyers. That's common among people who feel backed into a corner and don't understand law.

    The site is mirrorred on spamflames.com [spamflames.com]. As the domain reseller for that domain, I also received a legal threat from Mr. Shifman. I have no intention of responding, and don't feel even slightly threatened by it. When I get court papers, I'll take it seriously.

  • Hmmm (Score:5, Funny)

    by Linux_ho ( 205887 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @01:05PM (#2810112) Homepage
    [linuxho@faramir linuxho] $ telnet mail.relay.com 25
    Trying 63.192.100.60...
    Connected to mail.relay.com (63.192.100.60).
    Escape character is '^]'.
    220 CheckPoint FireWall-1 secure SMTP server
    HELO mail.microsoft.com
    250 Hello mail.microsoft.com, pleased to meet you
    MAIL FROM: bill.gates@microsoft.com
    250 2.1.0 bill.gates@microsoft.com... Sender OK
    RCPT TO: bernard@shifmanconsulting.com
    250 2.1.5 bernard@shifmanconsulting.com... Recipient OK
    DATA
    354 Enter mail, end with "." on a line by itself

    Hi Bernard,
    I suppose having your name posted on Slashdot and having practically everyone in the IT industry know your name must be pretty humiliating given the context it was published in.

    I'm sure you've learned a lesson about when it is a good idea to back off and apologize, even when you feel you are in the right. This is probably the most expensive way I have ever seen anyone learn that lesson.

    I am offering you a job at Microsoft, mostly out of pity. Please send your resume to HR@microsoft.com with a cover letter indicating your areas of expertise, and attach a copy of this e-mail to it.

    Bill Gates
    Chief Visionary
    Microsoft Corp.
    ^D

  • Pissing in Bernie's Grave (Score:3, Informative)

    by FFFish ( 7567 ) on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @01:24PM (#2810263) Homepage
    His web sites, here [aavirtualoffice.com] and especially here [shifmanconsulting.com] have images that are surely copyrighted.

    I wonder if the copyright owner would be interested in a lawsuit?

Slashdot Top Deals

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Close