> Dear Mr. Iverson -
> Let's drop this NOW. This has been a two year battle, and it is ridiculous.
> You swear your job is to "protect" the Internet from spammers, well, you
> KNOW I am not a SPAMMER. You somehow got my newsletter. I did not put you
> on the list, and I was unable to remove you from the list, because you were
> unwilling to simply give me your address, so I could have you removed. You
> say you did not subscribe. I guess, like the frogs falling in Magnolia, it
> was some sort of miracle. I can see where this ongoing cyber-war could be
> headed, and it wouldn't be a pleasant journey for either of us. Why not make
> a truce, right now, which simply states that NEITHER one of us will write
> about one-another, without the other's permission, in any public forum, or
> contact one-another again. Also, I expect that, in good faith, you will
> write to midwestinfo and CMIT letting them know that you were overreacting,
> and that I can get full email privileges back. After that is done, I would
> like a guarantee that you will not instigate anymore fights, for whatever
> reason, and I will extend the same courtesy. I have grown tired of
> squabbling with you.
> It is not the newsletter that upset you, it is the update I wrote on my page
> TWO YEARS AGO, and the occasional postings I made on Spam-L, which were
> civil, and merely revealed to a lot of Spam-L members that there is, indeed,
> two sides to every story. All of these things are allowed, and are not SPAM,
> by anyone's definition. If you use that "big 'ole brain" of yours, you will
> see that you are harassing me, and trying to banish me from the web, because
> you don't like the fact that I'm using my right to Freedom of Speech to
> state things that you disagree with. If I was a spammer, who sent out
> 5-million "get-rich-quick" ads, maybe I'd be a worthy target, but, as a
> self-proclaimed "protector" of the Internet, aren't you spending a far too
> large percentage of your time on me, a person who has never spammed anyone,
> has never made money off of a mass-mailing, and has done no more than send
> out a newsletter to SUBSCRIBERS that are happy to receive it? Even if there
> really are 5 or 10 other people on the list who claim they didn't subscribe,
> that leaves 2,990 that admit they DID, and that ENJOY getting the letter. I
> do not think 5 emails, none of which are even selling a product, would be
> considered "bulk," by any means.
> This is a genuine offer, from me to you. If all is dropped, and you explain
> to midwestinfo/CMIT that they don't have to worry about being "blackholed"
> by MAPS if they keep me as a customer, I will never send you a newsletter
> again (unless you request one), and will avoid you like the plague in any
> sort of cyber-setting. Please consider my proposal. Thank you.
> Alex Sandell
BACK TO THE LETTERS