This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------D6C3E268BDDB7EAC3CE56D33 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --------------D6C3E268BDDB7EAC3CE56D33 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: <> To: mrshankindybiz@home.com From: Mail Administrator <Postmaster@home.com> Reply-To: Mail Administrator <Postmaster@home.com> Subject: Mail System Error - Returned Mail Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 10:39:23 -0700 Message-ID: <20000421173923.YVQX17350.lh2.rdc1.tx.home.com@lh2.rdc1.tx.home.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; Boundary="===========================_ _= 1375427(17350)956338763" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 --===========================_ _= 1375427(17350)956338763 Content-Type: text/plain This Message was undeliverable due to the following reason: The following destination addresses were unknown (please check the addresses and re-mail the message): <">"@home.com> Please reply to Postmaster@home.com if you feel this message to be in error. --===========================_ _= 1375427(17350)956338763 Content-Type: message/delivery-status Reporting-MTA: dns; ha2.home.com Arrival-Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 10:39:23 -0700 Received-From-MTA: dns; home.com (24.13.153.193) Final-Recipient: RFC822; <">"@home.com> Action: failed Status: 5.1.1 --===========================_ _= 1375427(17350)956338763 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Received: from home.com ([24.13.153.193]) by lh2.rdc1.tx.home.com (InterMail v4.01.01.00 201-229-111) with ESMTP id <20000421173923.YVQT17350.lh2.rdc1.tx.home.com@home.com>; Fri, 21 Apr 2000 10:39:23 -0700 Message-ID: <3900943D.6C6FD2D@home.com> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 11:47:41 -0600 From: margaret ruth shank <mrshankindybiz@home.com> Organization: @Home Network X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en]C-AtHome0407 (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ">"@home.com, OHHANCOC-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: Gen. scam References: <2183-38FF9B24-2022@storefull-275.iap.bryant.webtv.net> <39007886.85E47B1E@centurytel.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I had an email problem so didn't see the flames which came from that item. I responded to it privately with the information that the person should contact one of the commercial officers at the British Embassy in Washington, DC. The British do STILL CARE about their international reputation. I expect sharing of informati0on on these lists to include notification about reip-offs and inaccuracies in databases, etc. Margaret Shank ( Arvada, CO) Leah Raney wrote: > > Hancock listers: > Would someone please explain to this thickheaded Buckeye what was so awful > about the INFORMATION that Michelle posted? So awful that listers got on > her case? There was a similar situation recently on the Saskatchewan list > when an unhappy lister told all about not receiving what had been ordered. > The results were that the person from whom he had ordered the information > came up with it and apologized all around and the complainer got his > information and everyone got an explanation. Seems to me we should be > encouraging information, not discouraging it. - Leah in Texas > P. S. I'm also thick-skinned, so flame on if it will make you feel better. > > Michelle Reed wrote: > > > My apologies to any and everyone that I may have indirectly offended. > > It was not my intention to get personal flames by sending this message > > that if anyone would have read closely, was NOT written by me. I guess > > that's why I never post anything anyway. Too many bad vibes from > > people. > > I have learned from my mistake, and will NEVER post anything other than > > my personal quiries. > > I do appreciate that all responses were mailed directly to me and not to > > bother the other listers. > > Michelle --===========================_ _= 1375427(17350)956338763-- --------------D6C3E268BDDB7EAC3CE56D33--