JUNK EMAIL!

The Campaign to Stop Junk EmailWeb Site
It's irritating. It's rude. It's stupid. In short, it's a Really Bad Idea. Let's put an end to Junk Email right now.
Visits to this site: (Counter provided by Web Counter )More detailed server statistics for this page are also available.
Introduction
Lately I have been getting more and more unsolicited commercial email ("Junk email," also called "spam"). And, frankly, I'm damn sick of it.
This site is directed primarily at the victims of junk email, which generally means recipients, although junk emailers certainly cause systems operators and others big headaches, as well. Our goal is to eliminate all junk email.
To accomplish this goal, we will attempt to teach victims and potential victims (that's everyone with an email address) the most effective methods of prevention and retribution. We also hope to get current and potential junk emailers to see the error of their ways by making them see it from the victim's point of view, and getting them to understand why postage-due marketing isn't very effective.
Open Letter
The tips and tactics found on this site will (and have) gotten individual spammers kicked off the Internet, and will help reduce the amount of spam you receive, but ultimately these tactics are treating the symptom instead of the disease. After more than five years of battling junk email, it has become obvious to me that the problem is not going to be solved without some sort of legislative regulation.
I have been very hesitant to actually advocate this, however, because I fear that the US government tends to over-regulate things it doesn't understand (note that I was a plaintiff in the ultimately successful lawsuit against the Communications Decency Amendment).
Big ISPs like AOL have successfully sued spammers for tresspass and theft of service under current laws, but the level of lawyer power necessary to do that isn't available to the average junk email victim. We need a real legal tool to force junk emailers to stop their tresspass in our inboxes. Such a tool has been available to prevent the cost-shifting associated with junk faxes, and has worked well.
Current situation: Unnacceptable
The junk email situation is rapidly becoming unmanageable, and threatens to destroy email as a useful means of communication. The sheer volume junk email has exploded, according to our own incoming spam stream and other monitoring sites on the Internet. According to a recent European Union study, junk email costs all of us some 9.4 billion (US) dollars per year, and many major ISPs say that spam adds 20% of the cost of their service. We are being forced to subsidize spammers.
This is unacceptable.
Time to try something else
Despite what junk-email apologists might try to tell you, junk email is not an issue of free speech, it is a property rights issue. ISPs and individuals pay for and own their own equipment and email boxes, and they have every right to decide what traffic they are going to carry. You pay for and own your car, your home, and your fax machine, and no one has the right to force you to carry and display advertising on that property. Your email in-box is no different.
People who want no restrictions on spamming, like the Direct Marketing Association (DMA), decry any restriction as unneeded government regulation, and say that the industry should regulate itself. Well, I don't have to rely on any other industry to "self-regulate" their use of my private property without my permission. I see any reason to start now.
In any case, we've spent 5 years waiting for the marketing industry to regulate itself, and our inboxes are drowning in more spam than ever. "Self-regulation" on the part of the marketing industry has been a spectacular failure.
It's time to try something else.
Legislative proposal
The Campaign to Stop Junk Email proposes simply extended the protection of the current law banning unsolicited commercial fax (the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA), 47 U.S.C. § 227,) to also cover unsolicited commercial email. Under such a ban individuals would still be free to solicit advertisements (an opt-in system), so one could request commercial solicitations if one prefers. A critical feature of this approach is the private right of action, which allows individuals to sue violators for US$500 per violation, plus damages up to $1,500. This gives victims a real tool to force junk emailers to stop their tresspass.
Current legislation: Insufficient
Unfortunately, junk email legislation currently being considered recently had this individual right of action removed while in committee by allies of the DMA. Under the current proposed legislation, you would have to convince a state attorney general to sue the spammer on your behalf.
In addition, the proposed legislation now has a "one bite at the apple" approach, under which spammers would get to legally send you one message, after which you could opt-out.
We do not support any legislation that legitimizes "remove" requests (opt-out). That is an unworkable solution that would only make the junk email problem worse.
Here's why: There are 22 million small businesses in the United States, according to the Small Business Administration. To understand why this "opt-out" approach is A Bad Idea, imagine that each year, merely 1% of those businesses decided to send you just one of those introductory spams. On average, you'd have to sort 675 junk email messages per day from your legitimate mail (and reply to them, asking to be removed in order to avoid more)1.
This is insufficient protection.
Goals
I want the ability to say no to trespass in my mailbox, and the legal ability to force spammers to listen when I say no. I want the same legal tools available that I have when pretecting my other property from tresspass and abuse.
Note that the $500 fine provision of the TCPA have nearly eliminated unsolicited commercial fax. What is so hard about applying the same law to unsolicited commercial email?
Strategy
Here's the harsh reality: Major campaign contributors like the DMA get what they want from legislators. They bought them seat, they own them. face it: the legislators are always going to do what their biggest contributors want, if at all possible. If you don't believe me, just look at the history of the state and federal legislation so far: every time a potent anti-spam bill comes up, it is eviscerated in committee by allies of the marketing industry after their lobbying, just a surely as if it went down a dark alley with Jack the Ripper.
The only way to counteract that sort of powerful influence is to make it so publicly embarrassing to do what the DMA wants that the legislators can't risk doing it. We need high-profile public figures and widely-redognized technical gurus to accomplish this goal. Someone like a Bill Gates, Scott McNealy, Steve Jobs, or Larry Elison.
In the meantime, I urge you to contact your Representatives in Congress and your Senator. Tell them you want real relief from this flood of junk email, and that what has been proposed is a cure worse than the disease.
The record of reading email is shamefully spotty, so use paper snail-mail for maximum impact. I also recommend visiting CAUCE, who organizes political preassure to ban junk email. We all need to get behind this effort to protect our in-boxes from the scourge of junk email, because you can bet your head that powerful commercial interests continue lobbying hard to defeat us.
—John C. Rivard, 13 June 2001, Detroit, Michgan

Contents
On This Page
Action items Time-critical items you can take action on
News from the Front Media reports on the Junk Email battle
Why Junk Email is A Bad Thing
How you can help join the fight
Siblings-in-Arms Links reciprocal anti-junk email sites
Sub-Pages
Dealing With Junk Email (A Victim's Primer)What you should do (and not do) when you have been victimized by a junk emailer.
What Not To Do Stuff that doesn't work
What to do effective techniques, including how to trace junk email back to its source
Stay Calm (take a deep breath...)
Stay Mad (don't get discouraged)
Ready... Gather info, how to identify the sender and who gives them Internet access
Aim... Who to complain to, abuse addresses, online services
Fire! What to say and how to say it, effective complaining, leveraging illegal scam messages, phone calls, faxes.
Preventing Junk EmailHow to minimize the amount of junk email you receive, and discourage people from sending you junk email.
Do-Not-Mail Lists Do they work?
America Online has some nice blocking features
Automated Mailing List Precautions LISTSERV, Majordomo, ListProc, etc.
Usenet Precautions Biggest source of junk email addresses
The World-Wide Web
Browsing
Publishing
"Anonymous" FTP
Understanding Junk Email Further information to help you understand junk email and how it (doesn't) work
The Junk Email FAQ Frequently-Asked Questions and answers about junk email
How We Should Think About Junk Email Philosophies of (un)acceptability
How It's Done Know Your Enemy.
Methods of Address Collection
Auto-Mailers
Chain Letters and Ponzi (Pyramid) Schemes
Do-Not-Mail Lists and why they don't work
Big Net Companies and their Sometimes Unhelpful Attitudes
Other Resources Links to other anti-junk email sites and related materials
Information for Businesses
Why You Shouldn't Advertise by Email Guidance for current and potential Internet marketers
What ISPs Can Do Advice for Internet Service Providers
Action Items
See Tigerden's excellent round-up of Existing and Emerging Laws on Junk E-mail and take some political action on them, before it's too late! Write your legislators and governors on paper.
According to Wired News article, New Jersey Representative Chris Smith has introduced the The Netizens Protection Act of 1997 (H.R. 1748), a Federal anti-junk email bill in the US Congress that will outlaw junk email outright. It will attempt to amend the 1991 Telephone Consumer Protection Act, which outlawed junk faxes, by adding email provisions. Write your Representative and tell them you support this effort! You can check to see if your rep is wired enough to have a Web page. Snail-mail letters are probably given more consideration. [added 22 May 1997]
The Unsolicited Commercial Email Choice Act of 1997 (S. 771) has been introduced in the US Senate by Alaska Senator Frank Murkowski. Full text of the bill and an introductory summary (read on the floor of the Senate) are available online. This bill would not completely ban junk email, but it would require junk email to be labeled ("Advertisement" as the first word of the Subject) for blocking and filtration and mandate honoring of remove requests, with penalties up to $11,000 for violations. [added 22 May 1997]
The New York State Assembly is considering legislation to ban junk email. There is online information available about the bills, Assembly bill A06805 and Senate bill S03524. Both versions have been referred to the Committee on Consumer Affairs and Protection. New York State residents should contact their legislators to offer their support. [added 11 April 1997]
Nevadans, call or write your legislators (especially those on the judiciary committee): They are considering a bill to ban junk email! See February 27, 1997 AP article "Nevada may ban e-mail advertisements" [added 27 February 1997]
GVU's WWW Survey The premier Web survey. This year, it includes several questions about junk email and internet marketing. Survey closes November 10! [added 4 November 1996]
Survey about Junk Email Register your opinion! [item added 29 October 1996]
News from the Front
"New Nevada Law Portends Tough Fight for Spam Foes" by Jeri Clausing, The New York Times, July 20, 1997--The Direct Marketing Association manages to turn the Neveda anti-spam law into a pro-spam law at the last-minute! Very dissappointing, and a wake-up call to anti-junk-emailer forces about the money and political power of the junk-mail industry.
"Spam slows WorldNet mail" by Courtney Macavinta, Cnet News.com, July 16, 1997--AT&T's Worldnet internet service was so clogged with outgoing mass junk email that legitimate mail was delayed for more than a day. The junk email, from more than one of their customers, was eventually deleted from the mail queue. The identities of the customers were not released.
"Junk emailer fights for access" by Janet Kornblum, Cnet News.com, July 3, 1997--Cyber Promotions is getting kicked off of ISP ATX Telecommunications Services because it violated the rules of ATX' upstream provider, IDCI by sending out bulk junk email. The article indicates this action is a direct result of massive victim complaints to IDCI, as well as other ISPs blocking all traffic from IDCE because of junk email.
"King of spam meets its maker" by Janet Kornblum, Cnet News.com, July 2, 1997--Hormel Foods Corporation lawyers have sent a Cease and Desist letter to Sanford Wallace of Cyberpromo, ordering him to stop using the name "Spam," on which Hormel has a trademark. Apparently Hormel feels that Wallace is giving their lunchmeat a bad name.
"Computer users declaring war on junk e-mail" by Robert Gebeloff, The Bergen Record, June 8, 1997--Nice, concise overview of the junk email issue and pending legislation about it.
"Spammers don't hold their fire" by Janet Kornblum, Cnet News.com, May 29, 1997--AGIS CEO Phil Lawlor admits that his junk-emailing customers, including CyberPromo, have continued to spam despite their promise to stop sending junk email as of Saturday, 24 May 1997. This is a huge embarassment to AGIS, who had announced the cease-fire as the first action of its manditory-membership (for AGIS customers) Internet E-Mail Marketing Council (IEMMC), which AGIS touted as a "solution" to the junk email issue.
"Senate Spam Bill Proposes Filters, Not Bans", Wired News, May 21, 1997--Alaska Senator's legislation would mandate tagging, but not ban junk email.
"Federal Anti-Spam Bill on the Way", Wired News, May 15, 1997--New Jersey Representative Chris Smith is getting ready to introduce a bill that will outlaw junk email outright. It will attempt to amend the 1991 Telephone Consumer Protection Act, which outlawed junk faxes, by adding email provisions.
"Nevada may ban e-mail advertisements"; Associated Press story available on The Nando Times, February 27, 1997--Nevada's legislature is considering a bill that would ban junk email. It is currently in the senate judiciary committee. (see Action Items)
"Email spammer won't quit"; CNet News.com, November 7, 1996--Cyberpromo is in court again, this time claiming AOL's junk email filter violates antitrust laws.
"Junk emailer down for the count"; CNet News.com, November 4, 1996--Federal judge has ruled that AOL is not a public forum, and thus first amendment arguement for junk email is bogus.
"Mass emailer back on Sprint, temporarily"; CNet News.com, October 30, 1996--Cyber Promotions will be allowed to use Sprint till November 15. They are shopping for new ISPs.
"Major Spammer Is On The Verge Of Bankruptcy"; Inter@ctive Week, October 24, 1996--CyberPromotions is about to belly-up now that their net access has been yanked by Sprint; meanwhile they are being sued by AOL, CompuServe, Prodigy, SprintNet and Concentric Networks.
"CompuServe wins order against spam mailer; AOL debuts anti-junk mail tool"; PC Week Online, October 24, 1996
"E-Mail Porno Messages May Be Hoax"; Computer News Daily, October 23, 1996--Recent child-porn message (itself a particularly disgusting junk email) may have been prank targeted at a junk emailer.
"No spams: Online guides to thwarting junk E-mail"; PC Week Online, October 14, 1996 (Jeff's Internet Adventure column)
"A Spam King Taunts and Tests His Foes"; The New York Times, October 10, 1996
"Junk e-mail wars heat up again AOL reinstitutes its shield against marketers' bulk mailings, but the case is still being fought in the courts--and on the Web"; Money Daily, September 27, 1996
"AOL's War on Junk E-Mail Escalates, but to Little Avail"; The New York Times, September 26, 1996 (free registration required to access full text online)
"Junk E-Mail: Obnoxious and Profitable"; The New York Times, September 21, 1996
"AOL Blocked in Junk E-Mail Battle"; Computer News Daily, September 21, 1996
"Court lets AOL block email"; CNet/News.com, September 20, 1996
"Short: AOL resumes email blocking"; CNet/News.com, September 20, 1996
"Junking junk e-mail"; San Jose Mercury News, September 19, 1996
"Voice and e-mail help them save, but we pay (of course)"; San Jose Mercury News, September 15, 1996
"New York's Panix Service Is Crippled by Hacker Attack"; The New York Times, September 14, 1996--Discusses Panix' AOL-like junk email filtering and a possibly related Syn-flood attack.
"AOL asks court to allow junk email ban"; CNet/News.com, September 13, 1996
"Judge Prevents AOL From Blocking E-Mail"; The New York Times, September 7, 1996
"AOL fights to ban junk email"; CNet/News.com, September 6, 1996
"Online Service Blocks 'Junk' E-Mail Aimed at Subscribers"; The New York Times, September 5, 1996
"AOL to block junk e-mail, Spamming is No. 1 complaint to online service"; San Jose Mercury News, September 5, 1996
"Tired of "Spam?" Junk e-mail delivers headaches to users"; CNNfn (The Financial Network), July 30, 1996
"AOL and Marketer Do Battle Over Mass E-Mailings"; The New York Times, July 4, 1996
"Junk-mailers Discover The Internet..."; Computer News Daily, June 25, 1996
"... And How To Avoid Them"; Computer News Daily, June 25, 1996
"Groups Pen Junk E-Mail Guidelines"; Inter@ctive Week, June 24, 1996--Electronic junk mail now has the blessing of one of the industry's most influential trade groups.
"Virtual Magistrate Decides AOL Ad Case"; The New York Times, May 24, 1996
"Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam..."; The Netly News, April 3, 1996
"Fighting Off Junk E-Mail"; The New York Times,March 8, 1996--discusses junk email versus junk snail mail and "do-not-mail" lists
"How to keep the spam off your e-mail plate"; Money Daily, February 7, 1996
Make the Junk Email Stop, Please? column by Kim Komando (date unknown)
"Battle for the Soul of the Internet"; Time, July 25, 1994
Why Junk Email is A Bad ThingJunk email is bad because:
The recipient of the advertising is forced to pay the cost of the message. People pay for an email mailbox for various reasons, but not because they want to receive advertising. It costs the recipient real money in terms of extra connect-time charges, phone time charges, disk space, and lowered bandwidth. This is similar to the cost-shifting incurred with unsolicited faxed advertisements, which were made illegal in the US for that very reason.
It costs real money. Junk email wastes recipient's valuable time, because they have to spend extra time to download the unwanted messages, and then to wade through the junk email in order to get to the email they actually want. This costs real money in terms of productive time wasted sorting, identifying, and discarding unwanted junk email.
Junk email clogs up people's email boxes, mingling with and sometimes even preventing receipt of legitimate email. As more people conduct more business over the Net, this type of disruption can cost even more money.
It may cause employers to pull employee internet email access, because they don't want to pay money for their employees to receive advertisements, nor for the lost productivity of their employees wasting (employer-paid) time identifying and discarding junk email. This lessens diversity of the community and hurts the Internet as a whole, and hurts the advancement of the Internet as a medium for commerce.
It is contrary to the helpful and personal culture of the Internet The reason the Internet and interactive communication in general has become so popular is because of the personal one-to-one interaction possible with this technology. People from all over the world have helped each other with problems ranging from the technical to the intensely personal. Impersonal mass-emailings are the antithesis of the an Internet community.
It is inappropriate and contrary to the interactive nature of the Internet medium. Junk email is barely interactive at best, and is often not interactive at all, because the sender forged a fake return address to avoid retribution. It is sender-oriented push advertising, not an interactive, recipient-centered pull of information. Junk email is based on outdated advertising model.
It discourages people from participating in the Internet The saddest thing of all about junk email is that it subtly destroys the things that made the Internet so attractive to people in the first place. People are already withdrawing from participating in Usenet, because junk emailers collect most of their addresses from Usenet. This harms everyone who has benefited from the advice and emotional support other people have provided through Usenet. People who gave the most back to the Internet, by posting the most responses to Usenet questions, are the most likely to be abused by junk email. People who do still participate are forced to provide false addresses, making direct communication difficult or impossible. For the same reason, some people are not putting their email addresses on their Web pages anymore, making it harder to communicate feedback and opinion. In this way, junk email stifles communication, making the Web more like television: a one-way medium. People are also attempting to get their email addresses out of publicly-available directories due to junk email, just like people unlist their telephone numbers to avoid telemarketing calls. Friends who have lost contact cannot reestablish communication by email.
The Growing ProblemWhy Junk Email Exists
If reports on the Net and my own mailbox are any indication, junk email is increasing dramatically. The reason it is growing in popularity among advertisers seems to be combination of
A growing mainstream awareness of the Internet (note that I said "awareness," not "understanding"),
The popular media picture of the Net as "hip" and the Next Big Marketplace, and
The fact that junk email is unbelievably inexpensive, even compared to the incredible bargain of junk snail mail. (Of course, part of the cheapness for the sender is due the fact that the costs have been shifted to the recipients, who are actually unwillingly paying to receive the advertisement.)
The only effective strategy to combat junk email, therefore, is to lessen or mitigate these three factors.
The first factor is only going to get worse, and the only way to improve it is to increase understanding along with the inevitable increase in awareness. To this end, we should all try to correct any misperceptions about the function or culture of the Net that we see in the media, via letters to the editor, open debate, etc.
The second factor, the trendiness of the Net as a commercial medium, is probably hardest to mitigate. But it will also probably fade on its own over the next couple of years, as more people get on the Net and the novelty wears off. The Future of Net commerce is beyond the scope of this document, but suffice it to say that the Net will soon be as ubiquitous as the telephone, and we don't really distinguish "telephone commerce" from other types. It's just another method of conducting business.
The third factor, the inexpensiveness of junk email, is where we can have the most effect. Until the cost burden of junk email can be shifted back to the advertisers, junk email will flourish.
Adding cost to the advertiser's end of the equation must be our primary focus.
How You Can Help
First of all, if you have any ideas to improve this page and/or help deal with junk email, by all means send them in.
Secondly, don't let junk email go unpunished. If you just delete it and don't complain, your silence indicates acceptance. The only way to stop junk email is to change the situation so that it is no longer worthwhile to send junk email. To accomplish this, you must take action.
Thirdly, make your voice heard via the Action Items
Finally, feel free to copy the icons below for use on your own Web pages. I'd appreciate an acknowledgement with a link back to this page, and an email letting me know you used a logo and where. Other than that, I currently have no other restrictions on their Internet use because I want the Stop Junk Email message disseminated as widely as possible. However, I still retain the copyright on these images, and I reserve the legal right to change this usage policy in the future if I feel it is being abused--for example, if a blatant junk emailer used a logo on their site in an effort to disguise their true intentions. If you want to use these logos in media other than the Web (including but not limited to print, television, CD-ROM, etc.) you need to get my permission first.
Static Versions
NoJunkEmailStatSmall.gif (GIF format, 90 by 72 pixels, about 12K)
NoJunkEmailStat.gif (GIF format, 250 by 200 pixels, about 18K)
Dancing Baloney Versions
NoJunkEmailSmall.gif (Animated GIF format, loops forever, 90 by 72 pixels, about 17K)
NoJunkEmail.gif (Animated GIF format, two loops, 250 by 200 pixels, about 55K) Again, I would appreciate it if you made these graphics hot links back to this page, something like:

WIDTH="90" HEIGHT="72" /> Stop Junk Email Now
Siblings-In-Arms
Below are sites I am aware of which have linked to the Campaign to Stop Junk Email home page, and/or are displaying the "No Junk Email" badge of honor. If I missed your site, let me know and I will add it. I encourage free use of the "No Junk Email" logo on the Web as long as you provide credit via a link back to this page (see terms above--I do still retain the copyright). I assume that a site displaying the logo agrees with what they find here, but this does not necessarily mean that I agree with (or am even aware of) all opinions found at these sites. See legal disclaimers.
David Topping's Outlaw Junk E-mail Now Page
Bulk email reading and evaluating. Low cost. A clever tactic.
Dave Touretzky's Home Page
Dave "Tres Bizarre" Solko's junk email policy
Fight Unsolicited Junk E-Mail! Featuring Shawn's "Stop Them Spammers Dead!" Tutorial
Spam (Not the Hormel product) Many worthwhile suggestions and interesting public comments.
Tom Raynor's I HATE Junk E-Mail Web Page Good documentation of the phenomenon and big offenders
Internet Info & other cool stuff Part of Mike Cohen's Web site
Christopher Lott's misc.invest Investment FAQ
Spencer's UMCC Web page says nice things about the graphic
STOP UCE - Uninvited Commercial E-mail Does Junk Email by any other name smell as...
The Pinkboard Panther's Junk Email page (Uses some strong language--expletive-allergic visitors: you've been warned.)
Junction Income Tax and Accounting Services
CyberMe's #CyberChat Home Page
Mark Neely's Anti-UMail FAQ
Fred Elbel's How to Get Rid of Junk Mail, Spam, and Telemarketers
Anders Eliasson's Official Total Waste Of Time Home page
Cristian Redferne's Rothbart's Revenge & Retribution site
96, Damar Group, Ltd., Anti-Spamming Sites page
Tim's Web site
Bob Allison's site
Russ-Smith's Telemarketing and E-Mail Marketing Consumer Information Source
Ram Avrahami's on-line privacy petition
Christopher M. Hannington's Computer Concepts page
Tomas Ahl's home page
darren (d.j.) mackenzie's The Doctor's Home Page
Pat's Boating in Canada
Patrik Rådman's home page
Tilo Sloboda's pages at UniKA and CMU
Chuck Biddinger's site
Christopher Phillips Cigar Bums page
Ansbert Kneip's home page (in German)
J. Scott Elam's spam page
Benson Shiu's Pen-Pal City
Mathue Taxion's page
Clyde Sherman's Roman Web (Rome, Georgia, USA)
Ray Helie's BrowserCheck (check if your browser coughs up your email address without your knowledge)
Thomas Jaeger's CZAR Software site
Jim Dawson's Web page
Chuck Biddinger's Electronic Repair Company site
Jeremy Fischer's home page
Herman Miller's home page
Annie Hughes' homepage
Ron Rogers' junk mail page
Alexander Wong Neng Li's page
Rob Agnew's home page
Tony Powell's "A Quiet Place" and Avalon, home of the "Pointer"
Dennis Major's Tritech Financial Systems Inc. site
Olivier Bockstal's home page (Belgium)
Mark Roberts' humorous anti-email page
Eric Boshart's home page
Chris Parker's home page
Joseph Montgomery's Web page
Karen Rhodes' social issues page
Steve Schwartz's California Mustangs site
George F. Nemeyer's junk mail Web pages
Stephen's Athena Online
Spam Slam
Paul Bunnell' home page
Steve Smith's Spam Page
David J. N. Begley's contact info and email blocking pages
Erol's is including the page in their standard "anti-spam" response (sent to Erol's customers when they report being annoyed by junk email)
Michael H. Riddle's site
Robert Braver's site
Bob Fayne's site
Alex Feldstein's page
Ian Hayes' page
Carla Di Paola's Carlotta's Inc.
Anti-Spamming
Advanced Internet Services Webmaster uses the logo on several pages: http://www.sedona.net/, http://ais.sedona.net/, http://fp.sedona.net/, http://www.jaes-dragon.com/, and http://rofc.jaes-dragon.com/
Joe Cangero's daughter's page
Daryl & Dina Hinz's page
Col Freeman's page
The Gard
Jill Lampi's home page
Chuck Cavanaugh's "Mailbombed by a Hong Kong Spammer" page
Dave Clark's page
Henry Livingston's POP user's site
Jevon Nicholas' site The Acca Dacca Mecca
Robyn "Missi" MacDonald-Phillips' My Clan Donald site
Jon Eaves' home page
John A. Dutka, Jr.'s page
Jan Pieter Kunst's Jos Kunst home page
Ross Wentworth's Waste of Bandwidth
Jonathan Helis' page


Back to Top
Last Updated:Saturday, September 15, 2001 at 12:03:20 PM by JCRWebmaster@jcrdesign.com
Copyright ©2001 John C. Rivard. All Rights Reserved. This page is subject to these Terms of Use
Back Home