[unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

[John Newman]

> On Oct 14, 2016, at 2:13 PM, Razer <rayzer at riseup.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 10/14/2016 10:09 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
>> Reposting email clearly intended to be private
> 
> 
> Spam mail is intended to be private too. So I shouldn't pass that info
> on to a sysadmin or other person who might be spammed due to, let's say,
> hijacked address book?
> 
> IOW You ARE NOT MAKING A VALID POINT!
> 
> I did not request the emails, I did not originate the conversations at
> any point. I attempted to SEVERELY DISSUADE THE PERSON from sending
> them. Suicide threats from someone I don't know?
> 
> Fuck that. Go kill yourself. There are people trying desperately to live
> and dying for no good reason and I'm going to worry about unsolicited
> suicide notes from someone I don't even know?
> 
> Maybe I should feel sorry for that esquire from Nigeria who wants to
> deposit money in my bank account because he's being hounded by his
> government too?
> 
> Your idea of "Private" is perverse and dysfunctional. "She" ('her'
> recent spew before subsiding was very masculine in nature) has been
> sending this garbage to a few other UNWILLING RECIPIENTS whose emails

None of these other UNWILLING RECIPIENTS has seen fit to broadcast a private message over and over.


> she only knows because this list is so fucking unsecured it passes your

So "unsecured" ?  How do you suggest the list be "secured"?  



John


> email on to... whomever. Spam email harvesters etc.
> 
> I've violated NO ONE'S privacy.
> 
> Hugs and kisses... I'd like to be in your lap right now...
> 
> Crap.
> 
> Rr
>