> Yes, this is the same e-address mine had, and it appears that our Brit-po
> posts in particular were used--Candice
>
Golly, Candice, maybe we should feel flattered. It is odd, and one wonders,
bemusedly, what the context is.
And why would anyone trying that on so blatantly use an admin address from a
firm on the Web?
Peculiar.
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Candice Ward" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 8:13 PM
Subject: Re: Warning
> Yes, this is the same e-address mine had, and it appears that our Brit-po
> posts in particular were used--Candice
>
>
>
> on 7/10/01 8:21 AM, david.bircumshaw at [log in to unmask]
wrote:
>
> > Slight correction to my precious: the e-mail address was
[log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> > So who works there then?
> >
> > Did anyone else receive messages from this source?
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "david.bircumshaw" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 11:11 AM
> > Subject: Re: Warning
> >
> >
> >> I was just about to echo Candice's warning - here the virus was
attached
> > to
> >> a message purporting to be re 'Exhausted Angel' and was from
> > 'Administration
> >> Department'<[log in to unmask]
> >>
> >>
> >> Dave
> >>
>
|