BEWARE of PCWORLD.COM, they're big-time 3rd-party spammers.

General discussion re sg.

BEWARE of PCWORLD.COM, they're big-time 3rd-party spammers.

Postby Michael_Tsark » Wed Mar 26, 2008 6:07 pm

Thank you, spamgourmet. I had been receiving daily subscriptions from PCWorld.com for a number of years but today I expunged them completely out of my computer because to my dismay they just thoroughly convinced me beyond all doubt that pcworld.com magazine scams in cahoots with spammers which explains how come the vast majority of the time during all these years their product reviews almost always say ?Be the first person to make a review about this product.? Now I know why. Earlier today I felt a little eager to try the animation-maker software for beginners since I have no experience about it and pcworld.com website had strongly recommended it as one of their ?TOP 15 DOWNLOADS?. So I clicked on the link to their download webpage and clicked ?reviews? and received the same old message that I so often receive, ?Be the first person to make a review about this product?. Next thing I did was attempt to download the software but was redirected to the autodesk.com website, next I clicked on their download link to obtain the product but was redirected to another one of autodesk.com's webpages that said I'd have to first provide them a whole bunch of personal information in order to get their free basic edition software, including stuff like postal address, phone number, etcetera. So then I returned to PCWorld download and wrote a review to warn others about the download but when I tried to submit my review I was redirected by PCWorld to another one of pcworld's webpages that said there was an error in loading my review because I was supposedly trying to use an old link? So then I tried from scratch to start all over in reaching their download page and tried again to submit my review but this time instead of being redirected to the webpage about using an old link, I was redirected to their webpage that says ?Be the first to make a review about this product? as though I had been on that webpage in the first place and as though I had done nothing more than simply refreshing that webpage? So then I on my third attempt to submit my review I made a very brief one-sentence review while also mentioning that it was only a test to see if I could successfully submit a review, and lo and behold, the submission was successfully posted with no trouble whatsoever at all and there it was, I was the first user to post a review about the product. So then I tried another 4 times to submit my complete review and each time something different would go wrong where either I would be redirected to the webpage saying the link I was using is to too old or it would act like I did nothing more than refresh the download page. So then on my 8th attempt I tested it again by submitting only another quick sentence or two and it worked perfectly and flawlessly again and the product review was instantly posted but to my surprise my original brief review from my 3rd attempt was no longer posted which clearly indicated to me that someone at PCWorld website was monitoring my submissions in real-time and they were deliberately manipulating my product reviews which explained to me how come after all these years the vast majority of the time whenever I tried to look at a product's review at pcworld.com it would most times say ?Be the first person to make a review about this product?. Turns out that PCWorld.com deletes the vast majority of negative reviews which means they're in cahoots with spammers as one of the 3rd-party business partners. So then I went to my PCWorld account page and erased all my personal information including trying to change the email address by giving them a new fake email address except I couldn't change the address because they would send a confirmation to the new fake address before they'd change the old address, so from there I went to spamgourmet.com to register a free account to be able to create disposable email addresses, then I went back to PCWorld and changed my email address by giving them a disposable one, then I waited to received my confirmation email and was able to confirm to PCWorld that I had changed my email address. From now on anymore email from crooked pcworld.com will be eaten and destroyed by spamgourmet since I now no longer use that specific disposable email address that I gave to pcworld.com, but just to be even more thorough I then went straight to my RoadRunner webmail account to blocked and auto-discard all and any future email that comes from ?PCWorld? incase of the event that pcworld scammers still try to send their spam to my original email address. Here's what the full product review looks like which pcworld wouldn't let me post:

Reference: Maya Personal Learning Edition Review

Suckers Beware: At first I was hoping to try this software but unfortunately the selling of personal information to 3rd-party business partners for the sole purpose of spamming is big business with big monies to be made. The download link for the animation-maker software leads you to the Autodesk.com website where the download is only so-called free only on the condition if you provide all of the following REQUIRED personal information in order to obtain their so-called free software:

First Name (Required);
Last Name (Required);
Company Name (Required);
Postal Address (Required);
City (Required);
Country/Region (Required);
State/Province (Required);
Zip/Postal Code (Required);
Work Phone (Required);
Email Address (Required);
Description Of You Or Your Business (Required);
Description Of Your Primary Field (Required);
Description Of Your Industry (Required);
Timeframe For Purchasing A New Solution Package (Required);
Your Role In The Decision Making Process (Required);
Status Of Your Project Funding (Required);
What Is Your Primary Platform: Linux, Macintosh, SGI, Or Windows (Required);
Would You Like To Receive Email From Autodesk, Including Information About New Products And Special Promotions, Yes or No (Required).

The only two questions that are optional to answer is "Address 2" and "Remember Me On This Computer, Yes Or No?" They're using their animation-maker software as nothing more than bait-trappings as the equivalent of a telemarketing gimmick for spamming purposes, for example, in the trick-question of "What is your role in the decision making process" their drop-down-menu gives you 3 choices to choose from either "Decision Maker", or "Recommender/Influencer", or "No Involvement". The secret purpose for those question is to find out if you're married or not and/or if you're the husband then you're most likely the primary income provider who makes the money in the family and most likely have money in a savings bank account since you have a family to think about, or if you might be the wife or a single man or woman, or if you might be just a dependent member of the family without your own money, etcetera, and that way autodesk.com will have a better idea of what kind of priority spam to target you with. Only people with scam mentality will pretend to offer you something for so-called "free" while at the same time employ typical telemarketing gimmickry to secretly trick you into letting them gather as much personal information they can get in order to sell that information to as many 3rd-party spammers who'll pay big monies for such information. Honest legit people don't do that when they offer freeware. If autodesk.com were at least a bit honest they would simply come out and tell you the truth "Hey, we'll let you download one of our basic free edition products only on the condition that you first tell us if you're married and how much money you make and how much money you have in your bank account so that we can sell that information to others?" But instead they ask you about your business and what industry you're in and your timeframe for purchasing a product, etcetera, because they're attempting to determine if you're married or not and how much money you make, and if you might have a savings account and if you're the type who can be easily talked into buying things you don't need or don't want as long as a salesperson uses persuasive and/or aggressive sales tactics, etcetera. The question ?What is your primary platform? is also just a trick question to throw their victims off guard by asking a simple harmless question that has nothing to do with their primary objective of targeting their victims, but rather it's a tactic of using ?mis-direction? to make it seem like the last two questions are perfectly harmless and therefore make it seem like all the other questions must also be perfectly harmless. It's up to you if you want to try trusting autodesk.com but I'm compelled to tell you now, ..."I TOLD YOU SOOOOOO?"
- - - end of review - - -

From now on I'm sticking with CNET's Downloads.com who post both positive and negative product reviews. In the past I've had a few interactions with a few of CNET.com Admins and I was thoroughly and absolutely convinced that CNET.com is 100% Professional and 100% Honest all the way, which is something I rarely seem to find in the cyber world. You can tell a legit company from the rest when all of their Admins have the professionalism to respond to ALL and ANY of your emails in a very prompt and professional timely manner and they always say the correct professional things that you would expect a professional and honest company to say no matter how trivial the issue may seem to be.

Again, thank you much, spamgourmet.com

Sincerely,
Michael Tsark
Xeena's Law states: "What can go right is going RIGHT NOW."
Michael_Tsark
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:53 pm

Update: Perhaps beware of SpamCop.net Lounge Forum too?

Postby Michael_Tsark » Fri Mar 28, 2008 9:12 am

Postscript:
It's been around a day-and-a-half now since I made this post here and it's such a pleasure to see that I haven't received any suspicious comments. Perhaps you know what it is like when you might happen to describe in clear explicit detail to someone about someone-else's criminal behavior and/or of someone-else's criminal psychological profile but then the other person immediately responds by trying to absurdly defend the criminal and try to convince you that you're all wrong and that you're mistaken right after you just got through describing everything in factual detail? That's what happened when I went to post my discovery about pcworld.com and autodesk.com earlier today on SpamCop.net's Lounge Forum, the next thing I knew, I was getting what I consider typical criminal rhetoric in their attempt to make excuses for pcworld.com and autodesk.com in their attempt to convince me I was making a mistake in thinking that pcworld.com and autodesk.com are spammers. I've had enough of my share of confronting crooks before and I know what it's like to quickly receive ridiculous criminal rhetoric in response when a criminal is accused of wrong-doing, and now I'm under the distinct impression that poor SpamCop Lounge Forum have been infiltrated by spammers who pretend that they're not spammers. Perhaps only one of the responders might simply be naive but with each passing minute I'm surely beginning to have all of my second doubts about the other few responders who seem a little too anxious to either persuade me I'm wrong about pcworld.com and autodesk.com and/or they seem to want to try and change and/or detour the issue? Right now they still think I only suspect one out of the few but with each passing minute I'm more inclined to suspect all of the few except for perhaps one. If perchance they eventually migrate over to this forum and try to defend pcworld.com and autodesk.com with silly rhetoric you'll see what I mean. Wow? It's been an eye-opener.
Xeena's Law states: "What can go right is going RIGHT NOW."
Michael_Tsark
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:53 pm

Postby lwc » Fri Mar 28, 2008 4:29 pm

Is this topic spam?
lwc
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 9:09 am

Spammers, not spam, but spammers.

Postby Michael_Tsark » Sat Mar 29, 2008 5:05 am

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote in reply to: BEWARE of PCWORLD.COM, they're big-time 3rd-party spammers.
Member: lwc
Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 152
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 6:29 am
?Is this topic spam?? Unquote.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh no, Iwc, not at all, but rather this is about spammers, Iwc, and not spam, per se, hence, the topic title contains the word "spammers" instead of "spam". Can you say "s-p-a-m-m-e-r-s"? If it's all about spam that you're looking to read about, then sorry, this is not the thread for you because this is more about spammers, Iwc, than about any particular spam in itself. I sincerely apologize for all of the confusion that you were quite unable to figure it out on your own from reading my two original posts that this is about spammers and not spam and the only suggestion I can think of that I hope might possibly be of some viable help to you is if you took the time to systematically go through all the other threads and ask your same question "Is this topic spam?" then I'm sure sooner or later you'll find what you're looking for, but thank you so much for asking and I hope I've been of great help to you, and don't you be shy now, you can ask me anytime?

Okay, then, you're dismissed now because I still have some more grownup things I have to talk about such as how spammers with scam mentality naturally tend to stick together and how they cannot control themselves when they come across any opportunity to antagonize each others' victims because scammers think they're all so sly about it because their limited I.Q. convinces themselves that no one else can tell what shenanigans they're up to, or how scammers will always inevitably attempt to defend for each other and so this thread has nothing to do with spam, per se, but rather this is about spammers and their typical scammy psychological profile, can you say "s-c-a-m-m-y"? Very good!!!, Iwc!!!, I'm so proud of you!!! Okay, you can go now before you get more confused like you did with my original two postings on this thread. That's it, git-a-long now, 'cause I have more grownup stuff to talk about...

...Is the kid gone yet?... ...Oh, good... ...As I was about to add to this thread, I find it very interesting to note that within two hours of my posting my suspicions on SpamCop.net Forum of suspecting at least 4 SpamCop account members of being sly spammer spies that have infiltrated the SpamCop Forum, my usual amount of SpamCop spam during the last several months that was usually between near zero to perhaps less than 5 or so PER WEEK in my SpamCop account skyrocketed to 6 spams all within those two hours alone. In other words my SpamCop spam weekly rate jumped from usually less than a few per week to a rate of at least 42 per week in the course of 2 hours after posting my accusations. And during these same last several months my usual average of 5-per-day amount of spam that would typically reach my RoadRunner account received an abrupt upsurge of 21-spams-within-two-hours alone and more spam has arrived to both accounts since then and have already surpassed more than two dozen within 3 and a half hours after posting my accusation. In terms of my RR spam weekly rate during the last several months it suddenly jumped from around 35-spams-per-week to 147-spams-per-week in the course of 2 hours after posting my accusations. [Update: By the end of the day of March 28th the total spam count was 29 spam which jumped the typically weekly rate from around 35-per-week to that of 203-spams-per-week.] Coincidence? Me certainly knows it's not. And anyone who is foolish enough to attempt in trying to convince me otherwise will only prove to me and the rest of the world that they have scam mentality themselves for trying to defend on behalf of the spammers. Oh, yes, I've stuck some nerves alright and somebodies busted. :lol:
Last edited by Michael_Tsark on Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:07 am, edited 20 times in total.
Xeena's Law states: "What can go right is going RIGHT NOW."
Michael_Tsark
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:53 pm

More New Undeniable Proof

Postby Michael_Tsark » Sat Mar 29, 2008 10:10 pm

There's something else which I've just noticed but failed to have noticed it earlier. Some of the spam I've been getting since yesterday is being delivered straight to my SpamCop email address which points all the more to the SpamCop forum because in the two years that I've had an account with SpamCop I've used my regular email address and not my SpamCop email address because from the beginning SpamCop mentioned that spammers are often reluctant to send spam to SpamCop email addresses and therefore SpamCop politely asked new members if they'd mind going somewhat undercover by not-using their SpamCop email address so that spam can be intercepted and reported to webmail servers and that way the webmail servers can block the spam from moving through the Internet any further. Unfortunately the blocking may not often work because there's still many scammy webmail servers who ignore SpamCop reports and who cater to spammers and continuously allow spam to go through their webmail services, but the point here is that I don't recall ever receiving any spam ever before being sent straight to my SpamCop email address, that is, starting up until yesterday within the 2 hours after I had posted my accusations on SpamCop forum. There are different methods of reporting spam via SpamCop and my first attempt at using the quick reporting method to report such spam failed and I had received the message that due to something or other that was lacking in the headers the reporting process could no longer proceed and so I had to resort to an alternative reporting method. But dig this, I'm currently suspended from making any more posts on SpamCop forum for 5 days, how cool is that? I've rattled somebodies cages and they sure don't like me for it and it just keeps cracking me up. :lol:

And something tells me I'll probably end up using SpamGourmet a lot more often.
Xeena's Law states: "What can go right is going RIGHT NOW."
Michael_Tsark
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:53 pm

Re: Spammers, not spam, but spammers.

Postby Michael_Tsark » Wed Apr 02, 2008 9:32 am

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(In reply to: BEWARE of PCWORLD.COM, they're big-time 3rd-party spammers.)
Quote:
lwc
Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 152
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 6:29 am
?Is this topic spam??
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh no, Iwc, not at all, but rather it's about spammers, not spam, per se, hence, the topic title contains the word "spammers" instead of "spam". Can you say "s-p-a-m-m-e-r-s"? If it's all about spam that you're looking to read about, then sorry, this is not the thread for you because this is more about spammers than about any particular spam in itself. I sincerely apologize for all of the confusion that you were quite unable to figure it out on your own from reading my two original posts that this is about spammers and not spam and the only suggestion I can think of that I hope might possibly be of some viable help to you is if you took the time to systematically go through all the other threads and ask your same question "Is this topic spam" then I'm sure sooner or later you'll find what you're looking for, but thank you so much for asking and I hope I've been of great help to you, and don't you be shy now, you can ask me anytime?

Okay, then, you're dismissed now because I still have some more grownup things I have to talk about such as how spammers with scam mentality naturally tend to stick together and how they cannot control themselves when they come across any opportunity to antagonize each others' victims because scammers think they're all so sly about it because their limited I.Q. convinces themselves that no one else can tell what shenanigans they're up to, or how scammers will always inevitably attempt to defend for each other and so this thread has nothing to do with spam, per se, but rather this is about spammers and their typical scammy psychological profile, can you say "s-c-a-m-m-y"? Very good!!!, Iwc!!!, I'm so proud of you!!! Okay, you can go now before you get more confused like you did with my original two postings on this thread. That's it, git-a-long now, 'cause I have more grownup stuff to talk about...

...Is the kid gone yet?... ...Oh, good... ...As I was about to add to this thread, I find it very interesting to note that within two hours of my posting my suspicions on SpamCop.net Forum of suspecting at least 4 SpamCop account members of being sly spammer spies that have infiltrated the SpamCop Forum, my usual amount of SpamCop spam during the last several months that was usually between near zero to perhaps less than 5 or so PER WEEK in my SpamCop account skyrocketed to 6 spams all within those two hours alone. In other words my SpamCop spam weekly rate jumped from usually less than a few per week to a rate of at least 42 per week in the course of 2 hours after posting my accusations. And during these same last several months my usual average of 5-per-day amount of spam that would typically reach my RoadRunner account received an abrupt upsurge of 21-spams-within-two-hours alone and more spam has arrived to both accounts since then and have already surpassed more than two dozen within 3 and a half hours after posting my accusation. In terms of my RR spam weekly rate during the last several months it suddenly jumped from around 35-spams-per-week to 147-spams-per-week in the course of 2 hours after posting my accusations. [Update: By the end of the day of March 28th the total spam count was 29 spam which jumped the typically weekly rate from around 35-per-week to that of 203-spams-per-week.] Coincidence? Me certainly knows it's not. And anyone who is foolish enough to attempt in trying to convince me otherwise will only prove to me and the rest of the world that they have scam mentality themselves for trying to defend on behalf of the spammers. Oh, yes, I've stuck some nerves alright and somebodies busted. :lol:[/quote]
Xeena's Law states: "What can go right is going RIGHT NOW."
Michael_Tsark
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:53 pm

Postby SysKoll » Thu Apr 03, 2008 2:38 pm

Is your machine running Windows? You seem to be connecting from a PC connected directly to the Internet through a RR cable modem without an intermediate router, is this correct?
-- SysKoll
SysKoll
 
Posts: 893
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 9:24 pm


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests