It has occurred to me that I have done an awful job in answering my spam e-mails recently. This simply will not do. These bots require constant attention.
So, without further ado, let me grab a quick screen capture of my spam…
As you can see, the first e-mail is from Dope Hats.
Mr. Hats writes: “I savor, lead to I discovered exactly what I used to be looking for. You’ve ended my four day long hunt! God Bless you man. Have a nice day. Bye”
Dear Mr. Hats: I am delighted to hear that not only did I lead to you discovering exactly what you used to be looking for, but that you are enjoying it to the utmost! Too often people forget the four-day long hunting journey at the moment of discovery, but you, good sir, have chosen to savor it. Good for you. And thanks for the blessing as well. I consider myself well compensated for my efforts after having received your e-mail. You also have a good day.
The second e-mail comes from Dieta.
Dieta writes: “You know, I agree that people who live in close confines shouldn’t allow their cats to bother neighbors who don’t welcome them. However, as a cat lover and the owner of a dog who doesn’t really bark, I can say that it is just as irritating to a cat lover to have to put up with other people’s dogs not only making messes on their property but also having to listen to them bark non-stop. It’s like somehow they cannot hear their own dog when it is right outside their door barking for hours.”
Dear Deita: You clearly feel very strongly about this. I am sorry for all the messes your neighbor’s dog has left on your property. Perhaps if you shot the dog it would help with the barking problem? Well, try it and get back to me.
The third e-mail comes from Shonda.
Shonda writes: “Youre so cool! I dont suppose Ive learn anything like this before.
So nice to find any person with some authentic ideas on this subject.
realy thank you for beginning this up. this web site is one thing
that is wanted on the internet, somebody with slightly originality.
useful job for bringing something new to the web!”
Dear Shonda: You sure are pretty, which is why I’m overlooking your marginal grasp of word meaning and syntax (as well as your back-handed compliments; “slightly originality,” indeed) and just flat out propose marriage. Call me.
The fourth e-mail comes from Articles.
Articles writes: “I do believe all of the ideas you have introduced to your post. They’re very convincing and will certainly work. Nonetheless, the posts are too short for starters. May just you please prolong them a little from subsequent time?”
Dear Articles: I agree. Come subsequent time I will indeed prolong my convincing, believable posts. Thank you for calling attention to this failing. I promise to improve.
And finally, there is an e-mail from Gold Account.
Ms. Account writes: “Without free access to all information of importance for the interrelations between nations, a real improvement of world affairs seemed hardly imaginable. It is true that some degree of mutual openness was envisaged as an integral part of any international arrangement regarding atomic energy, but it grew ever more apparent that, in order to pave the way for agreement about such arrangements, a decisive initial step towards openness had to be made.”
Dear Golda: Whoa, whoa, whoa! Slow down, sister. No one uses big words on my blog that isn’t me! Nobody! So you can stuff your mutual openness where the sun don’t shine, because the only international arrangement we’re going to envisage together is fisticuffs! Good day! I said, Good day!
And so ends another lovely look at my spam. I hope you enjoyed it. It’s not often I get to make a Golda Meir reference. It felt good.