|
peanut posted:My email is a.lastname@gmail.com. I try my best to contact the sender and implore them to contact the intended recipient a different way, and to add an email verification step to their sign up processing. Several years back, there was a period of time when a good (happily married) friend of mine was receiving emails for some other guy's online dating account. My friend tried multiple times to cancel the account and/or notify the other person but nothing ever worked. I don't remember how he resolved the issue except that he may have just opened up a new email account.
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2023 15:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 16:37 |
|
|
peanut posted:My email is a.lastname@gmail.com. I try my best to contact the sender and implore them to contact the intended recipient a different way, and to add an email verification step to their sign up processing. I have a fairly common name and there’s at least four people with similar names that think they have my gmail address. Some soldier really sucks at filling out important medical paperwork, a sorority member orders lots of lululemon and custom sorority sweatshirts, and some party organizers really wanted to loop me in on their Super Bowl party planning in Denver. Recently I got an email thanking me for interviewing with a company and was I interested in a follow up? After I told them they had the wrong address they said the applicant put it down wrong on her application, whooooops. I’m trying my best to keep these people out of trouble but they aren’t helping
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2023 16:53
|
|
|
F_Shit_Fitzgerald posted:Several years back, there was a period of time when a good (happily married) friend of mine was receiving emails for some other guy's online dating account. My friend tried multiple times to cancel the account and/or notify the other person but nothing ever worked. I don't remember how he resolved the issue except that he may have just opened up a new email account. Did he get laid?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2023 17:55
|
|
|
ChatGPT write me a script where a goon shows up for his wrong-email-guys account and meets the woman of his dreams
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2023 20:39
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:ChatGPT write me a script where a goon shows up for his wrong-email-guys account and meets the woman of his dreams While carrying a printer 4 miles to meet her at a Starbucks
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2023 20:50
|
|
|
Tagra posted:That's the thing—it is good. The register activates it, and if the purchaser redeemed in that very second they would be good to go. But most cards get carried home or given to someone days later and by then the scam bot has cashed it in. I swear this makes sense in my head but correct me if I'm wrong: A gift card has thee types of transactions that can be run on it: Activating the card and depositing money on it, spending money on the card and checking the card's balance. Scammers copy the card's identifiers, put the card back and regularly do a balance check to see if the card has been activated. There's no legitimate reason anyone will be checking the balance of a card before its activated and is still on the shelf. If the company gets a balance check on a card before its been activated, they can flag the card as no good. When someone brings it to the cashier the register could alert the cashier that the card is no good and to use another one. Then the scammers couldn't check cards with impunity; if they check a card before its activated they burn it. They'd have to guess when somebody will buy the card. Its not 100%, they can get lucky and check the card after its been purchased before its used but it would make their scheme significantly more difficult.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2023 06:51
|
|
|
Both stores and customers would be annoyed by that, and can't have that. What do you do if all the gift cards in the store has been burned? Cheaper to deal with the stolen cards then missing out on sales and the frustration I bet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2023 08:31
|
|
|
If you ever had a card that was redeemed before you got to it, that's a well known scam that involves taking a gift card, copying the barcode off it, and then going back to the store and putting the barcode on unpurchased cards. Then when you go to buy the card your money goes on the scammer's giftcard. https://www.aura.com/learn/gift-card-scams#2.-Physical-gift-cards-that-have-been-tampered-with
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2023 22:37
|
|
|
Robert Facepalmer posted:Would they even need the physical cards? I got a fair number of Amazon cards over the holidays and redeemed them all in one session and I started thinking about some kind of keygen to just brute force shotgun generate redemption codes as they started to feel real same-y pretty quick. If you have a system to ping activated codes, what are a few thousand more codes to check in on? That’s called card testing and there’s automated systems to detect it and shut it down when you’re doing it real quick
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2024 00:11
|
|
|
Pantaloon Pontiff posted:Well, it does mean that whoever gets the misdirected document has been informed that it's confidential. That conceivably could help establish something in a lawsuit if the person who got the document misused it and was sued, or if they the person who received it wanted to use it in court and the sending lawyer wanted to get it disallowed (like when Alex Jones' lawyers sent huge files to opposing council). It doesn't protect the lawyer from any sanctions they'd get for sending personal information to the wrong person and doesn't really stop the damage. So I think it can do a tiny amount of good in some cases and costs nothing to slap onto every email, and noone wants to be the one to say 'let's stop doing this' and then run into a problem. A post from a while ago but I remember looking into this a couple of years ago and my totally not a lawyer impression is that, at least in Canada and the USA, these notices are probably useless and maybe very slightly worse than useless. They are pretty much useless in terms of suing the recipient for the same reason that the harassing documents "Sovereign Citizen on the Land" types send out claiming that, because you read the document, you now owe them $50k every time you use their name, have no legal force: you cannot unilaterally create a legal obligation on someone simply by having them read a document. The email notice might inform the recipient that the material is confidential and that you don't want them to disclose it to anyone else but the recipient has no actual legal obligation to obey the notice just because they read it. If you send someone an email with a link and a notice that, if they click the link, then they must keep anything behind the link confidential, then you might have grounds to sue them if they disclosed the information because they can chose not to click the link and by clicking on the link they have accepted your terms; a notice alone, however, is not enough to create a legal obligation. Likewise if the information is protected another way (e.g. via an NDA or because it is classified) then the recipient may have a legal obligation not to disclose it but it is not the notice that creates the obligation, the notice is just a reminder of the obligation. The slightly worse than useless comes from the idea that not all emails are actually confidential and if you put such a notice on every email you send then it could be evidence that you are aware that you need to protect confidential information but that you are actually making no effort to properly vet your emails in order to do so. This would then be worse than not putting a notice on anything because you can't even plead ignorance anymore. It would not be a major deciding point in most cases so it is only slightly worse than useless but it is still a consideration. My impression of the overall consensus was that what companies and lawyers should actually do is handle their confidential information properly, not send confidential information over email at all, and dispense with such notices.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2024 02:25
|
|
|
Speaking of Sovereign Citizen crap: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-lawyer-pseudolegal-lawsuit-1.7072762 CBC posted:Vancouver lawyer suspended after accusations of pseudolegal 'paper terrorism' over neighbour's deck quote:In November, Arbabi agreed to meet with a CBC reporter to discuss her lawsuit, but upon arrival, declined to answer any questions. Instead, she read out a notice warning of consequences if a story were to be published without her consent. They’re all really just looking for the magic legal spell that makes them rich.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2024 11:01
|
|
|
You just reminded me of the breathtaking list of demands in Curtis Got Slapped By a White Teacher.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2024 19:56
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:Speaking of Sovereign Citizen crap: Lmao this is coming from a lawyer: quote:She argued that she was appearing in court as "a living, breathing, alive woman," not a lawyer, and said she would refer to herself using a lowercase "i."
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 03:33
|
|
|
Thesaurus posted:Lmao this is coming from a lawyer: For those who haven't seen it, but actually weirdly enjoy otherwise dry reading, you may wish to read Meads v. Meads, the canonical "judge is sick of this sovcit poo poo" ruling. There's also a follow up about how that's turned out for judges who want to use the ruling to short circuit the bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 03:44
|
|
|
Jean-Paul Shartre posted:Very likely, but nobody removes the email disclaimer because they’re afraid they could get docked for not having it. “No, it wouldn’t have been enough, but you didn’t even try,” is definitely a thing bar discipline folks have said in many contexts. is this the right way to do it?  twitter.com/MarlonEttinger/status/1742719466859860340
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 04:09
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:Speaking of Sovereign Citizen crap: I’m gobsmacked that an attorney would do this without neurotrauma involved.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 15:25
|
|
|
Massive document but even the table of contents is fascinating. I'll work my way through it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 15:43
|
|
|
From Page 3:quote:February 15, 2011: Mr. Meads filed a one page notarized document, printed in black and red ink, and marked with what may be a red thumb print. quote:March 3, 2011: Mr. Meads filed a second one page notarized document, in black, red, orange, and blue ink. Again, it has unusual formalities such as a red thumb print. quote:"Affidavit in Support of Order to Show Cause" filed by "Dennis Larry on behalf of DENNIS LARRY MEADS (juristic person)"
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 19:53
|
|
|
Shroud posted:From Page 3: I tried quoting the best parts but I just gave up there's just SO MUCH. You haven't even gotten to the grifters or the vexatious litigants.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 20:20
|
|
|
How to the SovSubjs of Canada translate American SovCit US Constitution chicanery into their framework of being the Queen's property?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 20:47
|
|
|
Greg12 posted:How to the SovSubjs of Canada translate American SovCit US Constitution chicanery into their framework of being the Queen's property? I'd recommend munecat's video on sovcits, she does a brief section on how each country's version adapts the basic premise to their own set of laws. https://youtu.be/KcxZFmKrxR8?si=Se53mgyZdJIDh8Gu
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 20:50
|
|
|
MF how can u even be sovereign if some geriatric in London is literally the Sovereign Edit: thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 20:51
|
|
|
quote:"Many courts, including the claimant, have trouble understanding what is often referred to as natural law. ... Natural law — or as i call it, just law — is that which is so obvious that it is not required to be written down into an act or statute," Arbabi said. How convenient!
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 21:15
|
|
|
Greg12 posted:How to the SovSubjs of Canada translate American SovCit US Constitution chicanery into their framework of being the Queen's property? That's one of the things that gets called out in Meads, litigants in Canada will reference the US Bill Of Rights for their arguments, an important document which is also completely irrelevant to Canadian law. They won't square the circle because they don't actually understand what they're trying to argue. Volmarias fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Jan 4, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 21:20
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:That's one of the things that gets called out in Meads, litigants in Canada will reference the US Bill Of Rights for their arguments, an important document which is also completely irrelevant to Canadian law. I see people (from Canada) posting conspiracy poo poo on facebook and they get fB jailed for 30 days or whatever and they're all like "MY FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS"!!!! Forgetting of course that we're in Canada. Or that Facebook is "private" property where free speech doesn't really exist as such.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 21:24
|
|
|
wesleywillis posted:I see people (from Canada) posting conspiracy poo poo on facebook and they get fB jailed for 30 days or whatever and they're all like "MY FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS"!!!! It's always freeze peach except when it's things they don't like
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 21:44
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I’m gobsmacked that an attorney would do this without neurotrauma involved. I heavily suspect some previously unknown/ previously treated, now not mental illness is at play. It’s the only way I can figure out this lady getting through law school then burning down her career. Unless she just stole the identity of some lady
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 22:52
|
|
|
Ariong posted:How convenient! ‘Natural law’ is a legit concept in legal philosophy that is invoked to justify e.g. crimes against humanity trials.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 23:22
|
|
|
wesleywillis posted:I see people (from Canada) posting conspiracy poo poo on facebook and they get fB jailed for 30 days or whatever and they're all like "MY FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS"!!!! That's ok, no americans understand that either.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 15:44
|
|
|
Either there are a lot of out-of-work work Hollywood actors about at the moment, or the SEO spammers have added an amusing new wrinkle to their game. At work today, I had emails from Sean Bean, Jason Statham, Michael Cain, and Kate Winslet, all offering to optimise our website for an affordable price. Alan Rickman even offered to do it from beyond the grave. I'm actually looking forward to seeing who puts their name forward tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 19:06
|
|
|
Ugh… I’m getting tons of local republican texts/phone calls on my phone after voting (liberal) in TX. This sucks and I’m not sure what to do about it. I’ve had my number for forever (since 2000) and it’s never been this bad. Im usually super protective of this number. I hate answering or texting STOP since in my head I feel that just means they’ll know it’s a good number and sell it to someone else. To make it worse, I’m thinking of looking for a job soon which means I’ll have to start actually answering calls. Does anyone have any guidance on how to limit this crap? What’s the Donotcall website again? Is there one specifically for political lists? Should I start paying AT&T for something? I already use the free tier of AT&T protect or whatever it’s called. Sorry for the stream of consciousness post, but I wanted to at least get it all written down somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 19:47
|
|
|
Reply STOP and they usually stop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 19:50
|
|
|
If they might be subject to consequences in the USA and care about enforcement agencies in the USA, then stop is usually a good approach. Obviously does not apply if whoever is spamming you gives zero shits about any of that
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 23:07
|
|
|
political campaigns are explicitly carved out of the robocall rules can't imagine how that happened
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 00:49
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:political campaigns are explicitly carved out of the robocall rules can't imagine how that happened IIRC stop basically works against the carrier directly so the campaigns don't have any control over it. The problem is that not only did they carve themselves out, but they're just using the voter roles for "known active" targeting, and your name WILL be shared with every political campaign across the country that was given party permission to spam outside their general area. I volunteered for helping the Sanders primary campaign in 2016 and it's only just started really settling down; I used to be getting several per day. Settling down for now. Looking forward to my phone blowing up in 2024
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 02:07
|
|
|
I've texted back "suck my loving dick you oval office piss cocksuckers" once or twice and haven't gotten anything for a few years now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 18:17
|
|
|
wesleywillis posted:I've texted back "suck my loving dick you oval office piss cocksuckers" once or twice and haven't gotten anything for a few years now. This also works if your boss is texting you outside of work hours.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 19:01
|
|
|
wesleywillis posted:I've texted back "suck my loving dick you oval office piss cocksuckers" once or twice and haven't gotten anything for a few years now. That's the real trick. Campaigns hire people that literally copy/paste your number over from a list into a "to" field at the top of a pre-populated text to get around laws regarding autodialing to cell phones (which DO apply to political campaigns). The trouble with political texts is that your number is in a national party level list which the individual campaigns and organizations buy access to. By design the organization that has the national list will never ever text because they don't want to have to prune the numbers off and make the list less valuable. Telling an individual campaign to "Stop" will get your number removed from that individual campaign, but there's nothing to stop the national organization from continuing to sell access to your number to other campaigns and organizations. On the other hand if you make it abundantly clear that you are not part of the demographic that the campaign or party is trying to reach, the campaign will occasionally feed that back to the national level organization (along with a list of dead numbers) and your number will get dropped. Republicans kept texting me and even followed me across states until I replied to one of their Senate campaigns with "why would my queer rear end ever vote for Republican when they want me to stop existing?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 19:01
|
|
|
Ok thanks for the replies everyone… I will text STOP and/or Suck Tantric Ovaries, Penis! To all republican campaign texts I receive
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 19:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 16:37 |
|
|
wesleywillis posted:I've texted back "suck my loving dick you oval office piss cocksuckers" once or twice and haven't gotten anything for a few years now. I had to check which thread I was in
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2024 03:27
|
|