Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [ANE-2] Re: Grouply is Identity Theft Trick

Expand Messages
  • Douglas C. Comer
    Hmm, does anyone have similar doubts about other networking schemes, such as LinkedIn? I was recently invited to join that one. Douglas C. Comer, Ph.D.,
    Message 1 of 69 , Nov 30, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Hmm, does anyone have similar doubts about other networking schemes, such as
      LinkedIn? I was recently invited to join that one.



      Douglas C. Comer, Ph.D., Principal

      Cultural Site Research and Management, Inc.

      2113 St. Paul St.

      Baltimore, MD 21218

      Office Telephone: 410 244-6320

      Cell phone: 202 345-6030

      Fax: 410 244-6324

      Email: <mailto:dcomer@...> dcomer@...

      Website: <http://www.culturalsite.com/> www.culturalsite.com

      <http://www.culturalsite.com/>

      _____

      From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
      Chris Weimer
      Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2008 8:49 PM
      To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [ANE-2] Re: Grouply is Identity Theft Trick



      Grouply both illegally archives Yahoo group information (anyone who
      uses grouply is thus implicit) and in order to use grouply you need to
      give them your user name and password. The consequences of this can be
      easily imagined.

      Chris Weimer

      --- In ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com, "Lampros F.
      Kallenos" <xalkinos02@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > McAfee's Siteadvisor say they did not detect any
      > important problem.
      >
      > http://www.siteadvi <http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/grouply.com>
      sor.com/sites/grouply.com
      >
      > But as you will see, one reviewer, in a 2 June 2008
      > comment,
      > said that this is a spammer domain.
      >
      >
      > Siteadvisor has a pluggin that is added to your browser
      > (only for Firefox?) and provides safety ratings for the
      > links
      > that appear in your google searches.
      >
      > ANE-2 moderators have nothing to do with invitations from
      > Grouply. These are send by Grouply using the addresses
      > found in the yahoo contacts list of those who join it.
      >
      > _______________________
      > Lampros F. Kallenos
      > Idalion, Lefkosia
      > Kypros
      > --
      >



      __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
      database 3652 (20081130) __________

      The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

      http://www.eset.com



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Ariel L. Szczupak
      ... That would be me, and I use the ad-hoc term (Levant Semitic) for the 2nd & early 1st mbc when the linguistic situation is somewhat messy. I m much less
      Message 69 of 69 , Dec 2, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        At 02:31 PM 12/2/2008, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

        >It should have a colophon, no? or at least a date?
        > --
        >Peter T. Daniels <mailto:grammatim%40verizon.net>grammatim@...
        >________________________________
        >From: Yitzhak Sapir <<mailto:yitzhaksapir%40gmail.com>yitzhaksapir@...>
        >To: <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
        >Sent: Monday, December 1, 2008 8:53:04 PM
        >Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Re: Paleo-Hebrew
        >
        >On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
        > > Which means that (even if the tablet is genuine, and even if the ?Hebrew
        > > docket on it is genuine) there's no hope of knowing where it came from.
        > >
        > > At which "LS" (as you call it)-speaking sites were cuneiform economic
        > > documents in use in the NB period? --
        > > Peter T. Daniels grammatim@verizon. net
        > >
        > > I know Laurie Pearce as a specialist in mathematical tablets. Is that
        > > irrelevant? Why would a mathematical tablet bear a ?Hebrew docket?
        >
        >Dear Peter,
        >
        >I don't call anything "LS."

        That would be me, and I use the ad-hoc term (Levant Semitic) for the
        2nd & early 1st mbc when the linguistic situation is somewhat messy.

        I'm much less familiar with the evidence from the NB period. My
        impression is that by that time all we have is Aramaic & Hebrew, with
        a hypothetical Phoenician, assumed to be different from Punic.
        Nabatean & Syriac come only later in the 1st mbc. Is that correct? Is
        there really no evidence of mid-1st mbc Phoenician? And what is the
        current body of evidence and "common wisdom" about Samaritan?


        Ariel.

        [100% bona fide dilettante ... delecto ergo sum!]

        ---
        Ariel L. Szczupak
        AMIS-JLM (Ricercar Ltd.)
        POB 4707, Jerusalem, Israel 91406
        Phone: +972-2-5619660 Fax: +972-2-5634203
        ane.als@...
        ---
        http://yvetteszczupakthomas.blogspot.com/
        http://undiamantbrut.blogspot.com/
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.