Frank the Spammer has been NARUed!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Kris Baker" wrote in news:Xe9ub.25683$MA2.16
@newssvr32.news.prodigy.com:


"Richard Ward" wrote in message
...
Kris Baker wrote:


Looks like it.

I forgot to mention: prodigy.net IS sbcglobal

Kris


Since the "Steve McKee" post, in support of Frank, had
Frank's own sig line attached to the bottom, and was
posted through SBC Global, I think
any idea of coincidence has gone out the window.

...which means Frank is splitting hairs in his spamming
now, by disconnecting himself from his actions.

I wonder if McKee was also one of Frank's bidders,
since one of the other sockpuppets has now admitted
to it.

Kris


sock puppets?

"a. linklurker" wrote in
news:tt%sb.195363$HS4.1653527@attbi_s01:


"Fernando Lopez" wrote
Rare coins are hard to locate.


Stick 'em up your ass: then you'll always know where to find them,
spam-lover.

link



Vulgarity does not help this discussion

(Curtis Desjardins) wrote in
om:

(Wyates9339) wrote
I hope Frank Provasek has been taking names of all the people
in this newsgroup who have disparaged his business and sues all of them.

We haven't disparaged his business. We've disparaged his business
practices.
And I hope he does what you suggest. I want the chance to disparage
him in open court.


Curtis.


So have you been a "victim" of Frank or just another
busybody tattletale?

"Lumpy" wrote in news:bqndll$2135e4$1@ID-
76024.news.uni-berlin.de:

Frank Provasek wrote:
Business communication with my existing customers is not
spam. Sorry.

Why were you NARU'd?

Lumpy
--
In Your Ears for 40 Years
www.lumpymusic.com




Why do you keep asking this when it's been explained many times?

"a. linklurker" wrote in
news:e2Nsb.141428$ao4.450261@attbi_s51:



Really: Hellin Wallass is incredibly stupid: she been added to
*dozens* of revenge lists, for su her auctions are going to be
*hawked* for signs of infraction: each and every instance of her
breaking an ebay rule will be summarily reported by at least 10
individual ebayers.

link



Sounds like petty revenge to me. Beware anyone who dares threaten
Helen Wallace. She is a tough lady.

"Gary Dorman" wrote in message
. 158...
(Curtis Desjardins) wrote in
om:

(James Brautigan) wrote

Yep, probably just more jealousy than anything else.

Jealous of a known (and admitted) spammer? THAT is the funniest thing
I've heard in a long time.


Curtis.


His feedback is excellent. What about yours?

Feedback is nothing. ITs those who didn't post a feedback that tells us
more.

Ian wrote in
news
Bob Peterson wrote:

"DONDI3" wrote in message
...

In article , "Bob
Peterson" writes:


Not a troll's eye view, but the reality. Anyone claiming Frank does
not violate ebay's rules has to contend with his own admissions that
he has viotlated them.


We're not talking about violating ebay's rules, if we were, about 99%
of

all

ebayers would be the subject of this thread. Don't recall Frank ever

admitting

to spamming, only to sending commercial email in the course of

his...commerce.

As I recall he has admitted sending it unsolicited, which is a
violation.

What is the basis of `unsolicited'? If you give me your email address
you are inviting me to use it, and unless you tell me to the contrary,
you only have yourself to blame if I do use it...even if it is for
purposes you hadn't thought I would use it for (such as delivering
unwanted communications). Once I have been informed to the contrary,
you might have cause for complaint if I still continued to use it. I
would very much doubt if you have justification for complaint prior to
that point however.

It appears to me that `unsolicited' would not hold water where the
sender has not been advised by the recipient to desist. Of course, my
opinion only for which no charge has been made in reflection of its
legal value.

And a person who received it has acknowledged here that he received
unsolicited commercial email from him.


How did Frank get his email address? He might not have expected
commercial email, he might not have wished to receive commercial
email, but the `unsolicited' bit is very arguable in my books.


If he got their email address as a result of a business transaction or
inquiry, he has the right to contact them.

(Helen Wallace) wrote in
om:

In article ,
espam (WinWinscenario) wrote:
spam is unsolicited commercial email - thus by any reasonable
definition Frank sent spam, assuming the OP is telling the truth that
Frank sent him unsolicited commercial emails.

Why is there such unbridled hatred of this guy? It must involve
something other than coin collecting. Did he sacrifice a virgin after
he sent an unsolicited email?

Regards,
Tom

Really odd. He is one of the brightest "small shop" dealers
in the country. Used to come into our shop when he was about 8 and
knew more about coins than most old timers.

R. E. Wallace Stamps & Coins
The Collection Builders - Since 1948
940 West Belknap - Fort Worth, Texas 76102
817-338-4631

I know he was buying and selling on Causey's bid board when he was
about 11. Ended up running the shop after Mr. Causey passed away.

mj wrote in news:VWUxb.17636$yM6.16547@lakeread06:



Helen Wallace wrote:



There is just no convincing these jerks that unwanted email is not the
same as spam...



Yep, there is no convincing these jerks that unwanted e-mail is SPAM.



Just because email is unwanted does not mean that it is spam.

"RipCurl" wrote in
:


"Gary Dorman" wrote in message
. 158...
(DONDI3) wrote in
:



I doubt it. The pathetic creeps just wont let the issue die. I wonder
what their REAL agenda is for these attacks on Frank Provasek?

Pot kettle black.
The only people who wont let it die are Frank's bend-over-buddies.
So why hasn't frank posted here to defend himself? Why send his
cronies in to do it for him.



I think he was criticized for trying to defend himself. Now he
is criticized for NOT trying to defend himself. Does anything
make you pantywads happy?