Turn any trip into a diving vacation!!

On rsl, "Greg Mossman" posted:

"H Huntzinger" wrote:

He was also involved in my r.s.l discussion on Flint Island back in
June...he knows that the Flint island I'm talking about is part of the
Line Islands in the Republic of Kiribati. True, there may very well
also be a Flint Island in the St Lawrence, but that would be a long sail
from Hawaii.

But manageable if you find the mythical northwest passage.


To find the NW passage was the objective of Captain James Cook on his
fateful last (third) voyage. Cook discovered Hawaii instead (and the
Hawaiians learned what Cook when cooked tasted like).



I doubt we'll be hearing much from Dena anymore.


Actually, I've received the following offline note from Dena, our
wonderful little representative from http://www.thecruiseplanner.com :


D First off HH, let me reply to a couple of your comments.
D
D 1. The ISP which hosts the web sight of the company that
D I am affiliated with most likely could care less about a
D message posting that I placed on a message board (especially
D if they want to get paid). The message was individually written
D and placed there by myself, and was about myself.


Unfortunately for Dena, she sent out under the guise of the domain of
her current employer, http://www.thecruiseplanner.com, which is how the
owners of that domain gets held accountable for this misdeed of UCE/SPAM.


I've CC'ed Diane and Jim so that they can choose to take the opportunity
to apologize for one of their employees USENET abuses. Of course, they
can risk ignoring this, which leads us to the conclusion that they
tacitly approve of Dena's SPAM.

Sorry guys, but you *are* responsible for Dena's misbehavior until you
cut off her email address to your domain.


D Unlike spam which is mass mailed out to multiple e mail
D addresses. I take issue with the fact that the posting was spam.

Unfortunately, Dena's Sep 26, 8:20pm response to Dillon (who asked her
if she was spamming all the newsgroups) effectively was a Pro-Spam "end
justifies the means" comment, so regardless of any technical definitions
of what Spam is, Dena has displayed the intent to Spam.


Furthermore, Dena was posting from IP address 68.196.222.22 which is run
by optonline.net, and whose AUP for USENET:

http://www.optonline.net/Cservice/Ar...channel%3D68%2
6article%3D1993846

States:

"USENET/Internet Chat
Users may not SPAM newsgroups or chat rooms and must comply with the
written charters, FAQs, rules, or terms of service for those forums the
user chooses to participate. The user is responsible for determining the
policies of a given group/room before posting to it."

Yes, Dena did violate both of these AUP requirements.

Technically, this AUP is stricter than the traditional USENET definition
of Spam, but it is the contract agreement that Dena signed up to for her
Optimum Online account.



D 2. Rather then make nasty comments about me and smart ass
D remarks, if Greg or any other member of the rec-scuba police
D would have just noted that these type of messages were not
D appropriate in this forum, I would have graciously apologized
D for the posting and moved on.

Dena must think that we're all stupid to believe that.

Unfortunately for Dena, the facts are that on Sep 28, 7:11pm, Chilly
posted the Approved USENET Charter for rec.scuba.locations, which
explicitly states that no commercial advertising whatsoever is allowed.

Dena acknowleged Chilly's post, which can only mean that Dena is
purposefully lying.


Okay folks ... who really wants to trust your money with a Travel Agent
who knowingly chooses to lie and knowingly violate the rules?



D 3. Yes, I to respond with some smart ass remarks after being
D attacked.

Translation: Dena persisted despite knowingly being in the wrong,
because she thought that she might get one customer out of it (me).


Okay folks ... would you retain an employee who purposefully damages the
reputation of your company, just to make one small sale?



D "But I guarantee the PRICE I put together for a cruise
D that stops at or trip that goes to Flint Island is far lower with
D far superior service then anything anyone will provide you for free".
D What was meant by this posting was that I can, in most cases...


Translation: "in most cases" is backpeddling on the promise.

This a useless "Guarantee" by any reasonable standard: Yet Another
empty promise from a Representative of http://www.thecruiseplanner.com
travel agency.


D ...beat any price for a cruise that you might find and I
D guarantee that the service that I provide will be second to none.

I'm just waiting for the caveat that will follow on the "service" part.


D And because I am honest and do believe in good service, if I cant
D beat a price, which is rare, I will come out and tell you!!

Dena has had her chance to do just that, but she didn't take it.

Yet Another empty promise and another lie from a Representative of
http://www.thecruiseplanner.com travel agency.


D 4. "IMNSHO, that's an astoundingly empty promise, considering
D that you don't even know where the islands I was asking about
D were even located"

Editorial note: Dena's quoting me here.


D Where in my posting did I ever say that I
D don't know were the islands are. I stated that I was not sure
D of the diving on Flint Island and would have to do some research.

And despite Dena having a full week to research Flint Island, not only
did she come up with nothing, she didn't "come out and tell [me]" that
she had come back empty.

So now we know that Dena's promise about "second to none" service
quality was an empty promise too. Gosh, this representative from the
http://www.thecruiseplanner.com travel agency is really not doing well
in the Truth & Promises Department.


D That doesn't sound like I don't know where they are!

Gosh, when one rushes in and makes promises before doing any
fact-checking (here, it was to provide scuba diving services on what is
an **UNINHABITED** island), if its not large heaping gobs of ignorance,
then what pray tell is it?


D 5. Quite frankly, I am not lying about anything.

That claim's already been disproven several times.


D I also work for myself - self employed so I don't think anyone
D will fire me. I have an affiliation with the cruise planner which
D basically means I use their web address.


Diane and Jim will determine if Dena gets to keep her affiliation or
not. Congratulations on becoming a headache for them.


D The cruise planner is not a web based travel agency such as
D Travelocity or some of the others. This is why the web sight
D is not as flashy as most of them.
D Less money paid on a web sight means less money charged to customers.

Left in for completeness. Gosh, Dena is talking an awful lot about a
company that she just claimed that she don't "work" for. Yeah, Dena
knows that she needs to kiss up to Diane and Jim....real quick.


D This is only a lead. People come to me because I offer superior
D service and usually a very good price. I like to post on the
D message boards because they are free. People who want a good
D price don't usually complain.


What Dena doesn't understand is that its not really free.



D LAST - if you want me to price out your cruise I would be happy to.
D I need to know your date of departure and how many people.
D I checked the link you sent me and it looks like the 12/20 departure
D on the Spirit of Oceanus.
D Just confirm this with me and I will get you a price.


And yet Dena didn't even bother to first pick up the telephone to even
call the cruise company to find out any other details...

....such as the minor little fact that this cruise is sold out.


This is the pitifully lame type of customer service that Dena Rose (108
Racquet Road, Wall, NJ 07719), for http://www.thecruiseplanner.com is
promising to deliver to you too.


"Honest!"


-hh


PS to Diane & Jim: I'm expecting to be in the St. Louis area the first
week in December on business, if you would like for me to drop by your
office for a chat. Otherwise, just de-spam my email address before
replying.

"H Huntzinger" wrote in
message
...
(snip) D and placed there by myself, and was about myself.


Unfortunately for Dena, she sent out under the guise of the domain of
her current employer, http://www.thecruiseplanner.com, which is how the
owners of that domain gets held accountable for this misdeed of UCE/SPAM.


I've CC'ed Diane and Jim so that they can choose to take the opportunity
to apologize for one of their employees USENET abuses. Of course, they
can risk ignoring this, which leads us to the conclusion that they
tacitly approve of Dena's SPAM.

That was a little harsh, hh. We'd already raked her over pretty good and I
don't think it was necessary to further instruct her by directly damaging
her relationship with Diane and Jim. Dena looks like a junior and so has a
need for seasoning.

(snip)

chilly wrote:
"H Huntzinger" wrote in
message
...
(snip) D and placed there by myself, and was about myself.


Unfortunately for Dena, she sent out under the guise of the domain of
her current employer, http://www.thecruiseplanner.com, which is how the
owners of that domain gets held accountable for this misdeed of UCE/SPAM.

(snip)

It's interesting that Dena would go to rec.scuba to spam for CRUISES,
while
she has not made her presence in rec.travel.cruises.

We has our resident spammer in rec.travel.cruises, Ray Goldenberg, who
has
been spamming here for months if not years.

The readers in rtc are mostly a bunch of Old Ladies tm who knows
nothing
about the VIOLATION Ray has been committing. They don't know anything
about travel, and they don't know enough to know that Ray knows NOTHING
himself about travel, cruise of otherwise.

Ray posts "news releases" nobody cares about just to spam for his
one-cretin travel agency.

He is expanding his spamming horizon now. This morning he posted a
"press release" which ITSELF is a SPAM for a travel agent network!!!

I've started posting Greenlee's slogan in rtc,

"Boycott cretins who spams in USENET newsgroups".

-- Bob.

"chilly" wrote

That was a little harsh, hh. We'd already raked her over pretty good and
I
don't think it was necessary to further instruct her by directly damaging
her relationship with Diane and Jim. Dena looks like a junior and so has
a
need for seasoning.

Hey, she was a smartass that e-mailed him directly to spread more bs.
Perhaps she, and maybe others, learned how unwise it is to tick off a
government bureaucrat.

Lee

"Lee Bell" wrote in message
nk.net...
"chilly" wrote

That was a little harsh, hh. We'd already raked her over pretty good
and
I
don't think it was necessary to further instruct her by directly
damaging
her relationship with Diane and Jim. Dena looks like a junior and so
has
a
need for seasoning.

Hey, she was a smartass that e-mailed him directly to spread more bs.
Perhaps she, and maybe others, learned how unwise it is to tick off a
government bureaucrat.

You guys are mean.

(wg)

chilly wrote:
"H Huntzinger" wrote:

I've CC'ed Diane and Jim so that they can choose to take the opportunity
to apologize for one of their employees USENET abuses. Of course, they
can risk ignoring this, which leads us to the conclusion that they
tacitly approve of Dena's SPAM.

That was a little harsh, hh.

Actually, being "harsh" would have been to blindside them by
straightaway reporting the domain to MAPS and Dena's IP to her ISP.
Dena is clearly wrong and yet unremittant.

However, since I don't think that Diane and Jim had necessarily been
previously privy to Dena's antics (and how they damage their company's
reputation), so I've been a bit more kind.

Nevertheless, since Dena is in fact using their domain for her email
address, they are ultimately responsible for her actions when she is
doing so as a representative of their company.

Diane and Jim's choices are limited: they can either support or
renounce their Representative's Spamming. They can also try to ignore
it, but in the USENET court of public opinion, we both know that
silence will be effectively recorded as a 'failure to renounce'...its
one of the ways in which the Intenet is surprisingly powerful, and
whose effect is magnified by the permanence of Google Archives and the
Wayback Machine.


We'd already raked her over pretty good and I don't think it was necessary
to further instruct her by directly damaging her relationship with Diane
and Jim. Dena looks like a junior and so has a need for seasoning.

IMO, Dena did have her chance to "make-up" for her violating the
r.s.l Charter by actually doing a little bit of value-added research
on my original question. The best that she did was to read the website
link that I provided to her.

It was Dena's choice to not do any sincere research on my question,
just as it was also her choice to instead to continue to market her
wonderful 'Services' that she wasn't delivering on. I made it a point
to be very straight about it (yes, I'm really going on that cruise) to
give Dena had her chance to make good, and she alone is responsible for
squandering that chance.


Had Dena even bothered to make but one simple phone call to the cruise
line, she would have learned that: (a) there's only **ONE** sailing of
this itinerary for all of 2005, and (b) it sold out around three months
ago. IMO, Dena's persistance to instead make impossible promises in
her attempts for self-promition mark her as an absolute farce of a
'Travel Professional'.


BTW, I did do some background research on Dena's posting history, to
see if she does actually act as a contributor *anywhere*. Prior to her
interactions while being trolled this past week, it looks like there's
been only one (1) circumstance where she actually offered any advice
instead of just her inappropriate self-serving advertising hyperbola.
So overall, Dena merely identified herself as yet another self-serving
Internet exploiter and not a Community contributor.

But if anyone here enjoys being exploited, then please do use this
particular Travel Agent.


-hh

Mean? Its not mean to shoot a wounded dumb animal to put it out of
its misery.

For example, Dena claims to be a scuba diver, yet I'm inclined to opine
that she's probably never dived in the the very well known NJ dive site
that's **literally** less than 10 miles from her home in Wall, NJ.

Maybe Dena could make up by agreeing to host a Halloweeen Dive & Party
in a few weeks..? :-)


-hh

wrote in message
oups.com...
That was a little harsh, hh.

Actually, being "harsh" would have been to blindside them by
straightaway reporting the domain to MAPS and Dena's IP to her ISP.

That would have been quite a bit more than "a little harsh". And I'm glad
you didn't do that.

Dena is clearly wrong and yet unremittant.

Yes, that's what makes me think she is very young and inexperienced. She's
still on a big learning curve.

However, since I don't think that Diane and Jim had necessarily been
previously privy to Dena's antics (and how they damage their company's
reputation), so I've been a bit more kind.

I don't think they knew either. And as for Dena, she probably thought she
was being quite enterprising. And had her approach been different, it would
have been.

Nevertheless, since Dena is in fact using their domain for her email
address, they are ultimately responsible for her actions when she is
doing so as a representative of their company.

This is true. However, I still thought she'd learned her lesson on her own
and it wasn't necessary to get her bosses involved at this stage.

Diane and Jim's choices are limited: they can either support or
renounce their Representative's Spamming. They can also try to ignore
it, but in the USENET court of public opinion, we both know that
silence will be effectively recorded as a 'failure to renounce'...its
one of the ways in which the Intenet is surprisingly powerful, and
whose effect is magnified by the permanence of Google Archives and the
Wayback Machine.

Frankly, I don't think it will hurt their business much. People on USENET
are unlikely to have used their services or recommended them to anyone
either.

We'd already raked her over pretty good and I don't think it was
necessary
to further instruct her by directly damaging her relationship with Diane
and Jim. Dena looks like a junior and so has a need for seasoning.

IMO, Dena did have her chance to "make-up" for her violating the
r.s.l Charter by actually doing a little bit of value-added research
on my original question. The best that she did was to read the website
link that I provided to her.

She had a number of opportunities to "make-up" for her violation as well as
redeem herself in other ways. Unfortunately, she chose to be defensive
rather than manage the situation of her own making. Customer service can
also mean "handling" people. Like you said, all she had to do was the
research and report back. All she had to do was continue posting in a
polite non-offensive manner . . no matter how she was being treated along
the way. Then she would have come across as mature, level-headed and
service oriented.

It was Dena's choice to not do any sincere research on my question,
just as it was also her choice to instead to continue to market her
wonderful 'Services' that she wasn't delivering on. I made it a point
to be very straight about it (yes, I'm really going on that cruise) to
give Dena had her chance to make good, and she alone is responsible for
squandering that chance.

It only took me 2 minutes to find all kinds of things out about Flint Island
and I'm not even a cruise rep. That's what I was trying to tell Dena . .
..it is unlikely that anyone at rec.scuba.locations will use her services
regardless. But I've been wrong before and she could have had the
opportunity to prove me wrong, had she responded with info about Flint
Island and kept a cool head on her shoulders.

There are many commercial posters on USENET and other boards. They do end
up getting business because of their style of posting. They are friendly
and helpful and eventually build up a trust with the other posters. Then
the other posters start to use and recommend their services. There are some
fine examples, and one I'm thinking of specifically is a Cozumel dive
operator. Another here and on rec.scuba.locations was Jim Wyatt (despite
his weather reports). :^)

Had Dena even bothered to make but one simple phone call to the cruise
line, she would have learned that: (a) there's only **ONE** sailing of
this itinerary for all of 2005, and (b) it sold out around three months
ago. IMO, Dena's persistance to instead make impossible promises in
her attempts for self-promition mark her as an absolute farce of a
'Travel Professional'.

Well, my take on it, is that she is very young and still has some learning
to do. She may well turn out to be a fine travel assistant in the fullness
of time. Assuming she can learn from her mistakes, that is and assuming you
didn't manage to significantly damage her relationship with Diane and Jim.

BTW, I did do some background research on Dena's posting history, to
see if she does actually act as a contributor *anywhere*. Prior to her
interactions while being trolled this past week, it looks like there's
been only one (1) circumstance where she actually offered any advice
instead of just her inappropriate self-serving advertising hyperbola.

I didn't even find that.

So overall, Dena merely identified herself as yet another self-serving
Internet exploiter and not a Community contributor.

I did notice that she did not respond when I asked her where she had been
diving and where she'd like to return.

But if anyone here enjoys being exploited, then please do use this
particular Travel Agent.

You are so bad. (wg)

"-hh" wrote in message
ups.com...
Mean? Its not mean to shoot a wounded dumb animal to put it out of
its misery.

I thought we'd already done that. Of course, it took a couple of extra
shots, since she wouldn't stay down.

For example, Dena claims to be a scuba diver, yet I'm inclined to opine
that she's probably never dived in the the very well known NJ dive site
that's **literally** less than 10 miles from her home in Wall, NJ.

She's probably a www just like I am. That doesn't make her a bad person.

Maybe Dena could make up by agreeing to host a Halloweeen Dive & Party
in a few weeks..? :-)

Good luck with that.

-hh wrote:
Mean? Its not mean to shoot a wounded dumb animal to put it out of
its misery.

Many LOLs (Little Old Ladies) may think so.

I hereby declare Oct 3rd a USENET Anti-spam Day.

I've been posting in USENETs very regularly since 1987. Not until
today have I ever posted 7 (SEVEN) consecutive posts in one newsgroup
rec.travel.cruises, within ONE HOUR, all responding to the resident
spammer Ray Goldenberg who posted all 7 of his SPAMMING messages
with the same template, "Hi everyone ... I have this news release ...
visit my travel agency phone/fax/web" where the ONLY response by
anyone in the rec.travel.cruises to his SEVEN "press releases"
(besides my reply) was

clint BORING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

which definitively showed that his "press releases" were nothing
but his excuse to spam for his travel agency! If it was of interest
to anyone, there would have been some follow-ups!

Meet Ray Goldenberg -- the thickest-skinned cretin in
rec.travel.cruises.

He could use Dena as his apprentice.

-- Bob.