Once you read this, you may never think about chain mail the same way again.
I just received a new surprise in my email yesterday. It spreads the gosh, believe-it-or-not “news” that a lady took a sip of a soft drink with a dirty can top and, what do you know, she died.
OK, I don’t believe it. This particular email is much cruder and more poorly documented than your average story about, say, alien abductions. Was there ever any connection between a lady sipping the soft drink and her death? Did something like this ever happened at all? Was the letter ever originated by a “real” person? We never established any of that.
The effectiveness of the letter depends completely on the credibility of the recipient. This letter bears all the classic hallmarks of a chain letter virus, a hoax, a scam spread by the cooperation of its victims.
Can Tops and Rat Droppings
It isn’t a bad idea to rinse off can tops, just like our mothers told us to. That’s the credibility bait. That’s not news. But the letter’s statement that rat urine “is toxic and obviously lethal” not only isn’t obvious, it just isn’t factual. Urine from healthy mammals may not smell great, but it’s medically sterile. This could be useful to know if someone on a lifeboat got disemboweled by a shark.Lifeboats not withstanding, the idea that a healthy human will certainly die, if they sip soft drinks contaminated with matter “usually” infesting all food cargo containers, is absurd.”A family friend’s friend died after drinking a can of soda! Apparently, she didn’t clean the top before drinking from the can.”"Apparently?” This “scientific” medical diagnosis claims to be from someone employed in “Dept. for (sic) Public Health”. The telephone number that makes it look “authentic” doesn’t even have an area code. The “Dept.” isn’t a municipal or county department such as Boston, or Cook County. This item is merely attributed to the “Dept.”So much for tracing the authenticity of the report.The alleged source here is one Kim McKinney of “The Dept”. Kim, if she exists at all, and if she actually works for a public health agency, never wrote this piece. “Obviously lethal”, for example, would be embarrassingly less than obvious to medics discussing the toxicological properties of rat urine. If she ever said anything like that, and her supervisors got wind of it, she could be reprimanded, or lose her job.
This was obviously second-hand hearsay, attributed to a fictitious person named Kim. After all, if you were really Kim, and you found out someone jeopardized your job by attributing this sloppy, unprofessional speculative rumor to you, wouldn’t you be pissed?
Yes, another fine piece of anonymous “expert” testimony. What can a reasonable person really know from reading it?
This one neglects to tell us whether the alleged victim was already 112 years old and had just fallen and broken her hip. Or, perhaps she had toxic shock syndrome and only needed a contaminated soft drink to push her system over the edge. Or, did she drink the soft drink in 1967 and die in 1992? Or, did she get distracted by rat pee while popping the lid, stall the car on the tracks, and get run over by AMTRAK?
Suspension of Disbelief
Think about it. If this “news” item had been exactingly specific about the causal connections here, it wouldn’t be news at all, would it? Hoax mail can’t afford to be too specific.Like UFO “incidents”, hoax mail “sensations” often hint at an official conspiracy to withhold complete public disclosure of the truth.We can’t tell you more, but that’s only because “they” won’t tell us. We demand to be told about the cover-up. If you join us, then they will have to tell us what they’ve been hiding from the public.
At this point, the average listener usually forgets to ask what proof we have at all that there’s ever been any cover-up in the first place. How does one know there’s evidence you don’t know about?
The popularity of mass hysterias and exploitative TV shows like “Great Mysteries” depends on a phenomenon that dramatists call “suspension of disbelief”. Shakespeare figured this out hundreds of years ago:
Something just happened on the stage (or in this email) that I don’t understand. But I’ve GOT to get past this, or I won’t be able to enjoy the play (or get the message).
Gee, what if the alleged rat’s alleged urine was diseased? How do you know an alleged microbe didn’t combine with an unknown deadly mutant ninja microbe to create an alleged new killer strain of allergens? You can’t prove that something DIDN’T happen.
You can’t prove the absence of a negative, but folks keep trying. You have to keep saying, “show me the evidence”, until folks get sick of you and wander off to badger a new potential listener.
People, by and large, are benevolent. By definition, we like our friends. We aren’t usually disposed toWANT to consider the possibility our inner circle is being duped, conned or scammed.
A solicitation from strangers may stand no chance, but the same solicitation from friends requires consideration and kid glove treatment. Chain mail exploits this relationship in an especially ugly way.
We call the “kid gloves”, this respectful restraint that keeps us from telling our friends they’re full of it, “keeping an open mind”. Out of deference to our friendship, if you say it’s so, I will not think about it too critically, so that I would not have to pronounce it total bullshit … If ever there was one, “keeping an open mind” is a double-edged sword that cuts both ways. We’ve elevated it to the status of unequivocal virtue.
“I know this email they sent me is a little confusing, but … but no one would go to the trouble of sending it … if there wasn’t … there must be SOMETHING to it, or why would anyone send it?”
For the unwary, this approach is very credible, because, unfortunately, there really ARE cover-ups in officialdom. What’s a girl to think? Well, I suggest she should start, anyway.
Most of us can distinguish between the plausibility of a widely publicized government scandal, and, say, the demise of one real live obscure dead person whose lips may have touched dried rat pee-pee.
This planted soda pop “news” is designed to make us assume that the one alleged victim was young and in good health, with no history of medical problems or toxic reactions or allergies, and that she dropped dead on her first sip of the soft drink.
In other words, that if you did what she did, this would happen to you.
According to this logic, soft drink cans would be higher on the Surgeon General’s hit list than heroin or crack.
As we all know, an unsubstantiable email rumor, posing as accredited fact, which urges the recipient to pass it on to everybody else they care about, is itself a computer virus.
Computer “hoax” viruses, spread by well-meaning people, have become a serious social problem. It was inevitable that the proliferation of total BS would accompany the dawn of the information age. Like any other gossip, it’s a game played in every status of society and the professions.
Don’t be fooled or confused by the fact that this mail came from someone you probably know. Of course it did! You don’t catch flu outbreaks on distant continents unless there’s a local carrier. Real public health people call these individuals “vehicles”, “carriers”, agents” and “vectors”.
“Hi, I’m a friend of Kim, and I’ve just become infected by the soda pop hoax virus. I’m writing you because I thought that you, too, might like to join me in becoming infected.”
Just say “no” to virus vectors.
Virus Families
Computer virus technicians classify this kind of “harmless” hoax as a virus because it spreads exponentially. What’s the difference between hoax viruses and code viruses?
Code viruses and “worms” spread themselves automatically, once they infect the host machine. Code virus manipulates predictable properties of the host machine, to trick the machine into replicating the virus.
Hoax viruses are started by malicious people who exploit the benevolence and cooperation of their victims, to induce them to propagate their virus to “10 other people”. The virus letter infects by manipulating predictable properties of the host machine’s user, to trick the user into replicating the virus.
The fact that the “virus” jargon is the same, in both the computer network and the public health professions, is clearly no accident.
Having a hoax virus on your machine does no real harm until you forward it on to other machines. The damage is measured in wasted time and resources, just like the damage from code viruses.
The Numbers Game
The power of a code virus is measured in its ability to destroy data. The power of a hoax virus is measured in its ability to disable sound human judgment. Numerically, The hoax viruses are probably winning.
The chain-mail math is the killer. If 5 out of 10 recipients each forward to 10 other people, exactly half of whom forward to the next wave of people, in the 10th generation of recipients, the number of new recipients is only 38,000 — but 127,000 people have, cumulatively, already received junk mail at this point in the life cycle.That doesn’t sound so bad…
If this virus-like mail thrives all the way out to recipient generation 15, which is hopefully not too likely, and only half the people are still ever responding, we’ve now generated over 12 million total pieces of mail. By generation 20, it’s multiplied to an astonishing accumulation of over 1.2 billion emails, both viable, and dead.
Most of these hoaxes are pretty crude, and hopefully die out pretty quickly. Let’s say, to get a different one started, you have to sucker people in by broadcasting it to a mailing list of 50 people, guessing that only 10% of the recipients might pass it along to an average of 2 people each.
That one dies out after only about 175 people have been annoyed. This is the happy decay point on the spreadsheet where the number of next-generation persons receiving a piece of mail dips below 1. There is a threshold of the chain-mail curve where fewer letters get regenerated on each successive wave.
The soda pop hoax virus letter is attached to the bottom of this article. It’s “just a letter” (plain ASCII text; no executable code) and won’t ever destroy any data. Its damage is done when a reader cooperates by sending it on to someone else.
Names and headers have been removed to protect the innocent. The copy I received was on about its fourth known generation (there could be other strains). It had reached about 50 recipients. The headers included the names of two known “repeat offenders”, people with a history of actively participating in the propagation of chain mail letters.
One of the offenders is pretty new to this game. The person who sent it to HIM has a track record like Typhoid Mary’s.
The math says there is a break-even curve for chain letters. Your decision not to forward such mail can put a big dent in the downstream infection.
You don’t even want to think about the numbers when the hoax is “really” believable, such as when it’s cute, and it promises love, good luck or money. This is the part of the curve where more than 50% of recipients are duped into passing it along to 5 or more people each, and the chain can last much longer. And you wondered why our Internet seems so slow.
My spreadsheet model says that if 60% of the recipients respond to only 5 more people each, we pass the numerical population of the United States at generation 17, and hit 24 trillion emails at generation 20.
In the real world, we would never get to the billions or trillions point on the curves. Servers and system software would suffer shutdowns way before that, people would be receiving and trashing copies of mail they just sent, systems people would strike back at the threat, and the virus would kill itself off by over-advertisement.
An endurable virus never kills off its host too soon. That’s why E.coli kills millions more humans than Ebola.
A “weak” virus, like the common cold, almost never kills its victims, but plagues mankind forever.
If it’s chain-mail, you’ll see the multiple-forward message headers. Forwarders don’t strip them off, because they ARE smart enough to know they don’t want to be blamed for originating the chain.
“Hey! I received this in the mail. Don’t know if it’s true or not. I just thought you (and 9 other people!) might be interested. So, see, I’m just forwarding it to you, but if you’re unimpressed, don’t blame me!”
If it’s chain mail, and it asks you to forward to many other people, and the information in it is unverifiable even if interesting, then it’s almost certainly a virus.
Don’t Walk the Walk, Don’t Talk The Talk
At the risk of being made to look unwilling to participate in a stampede, you should politely tell your sender (and only your sender, only if you know your sender) that you think it’s a virus. If you received it from a stranger, NEVER fall for the bait of replying to them.IF THEY PERSIST, there’s free antispam software you can use to filter out mail from those persons so you never have to look at it at all. Repeat offenders are on a power trip. If the reader likes playing along, it’s a free country, but you don’t have to play too.To avoid needlessly offending well-meaning or unthinking friends, you can just inform them you’ve installed anti-spam software. Tell them that important letters should never contain phrases like “please forward to all” because you might never get to see them.
“Typhoid Mary”
To tell you the truth: if any future message header contains the email name of the person I’ve now identified as “Typhoid Mary”, I’ve set up my Eudora mail filter to just trash it. That means that if he sends me mail, or if he sends you mail and you forward it to me, I simply won’t see it any more. You would have to edit out all the headers, or copy and paste the text you wanted to send to me … but common e-mail etiquette says you would do that for me anyway … wouldn’t you?But that means I can’t receive mail from this acquaintance any more! Surely there could be some less drastic solution, like me reading each email to see if I’m interested in it … don’t I owe that much to an acquaintance?Q: Say you’ve had this house guest drop in uninvited for years, and he has a serious drinking problem, and he always – count on it – gets sick on your rug and sofa. So you cut him off: no more visits when he’s been drinking. Wouldn’t that be placing a higher value on your rug and sofa than on your acquaintance?A: No, it would be placing a higher value on your rug and sofa than on the value of his drinking behavior. Replace the furnishings and get a life!
Inside Jokes and Old Hat
Many of the most enduring viruses warn you about the dangers of “new computer viruses”. They’re called “virus hoaxes”, though many other kinds of hoaxes also thrive on the Internet. There are so many of them that they have really become a great inside joke to people who know how to check up on them.Some of the funniest (and most unprintable) inside jokes on the Internet are currently about people who send email chain letters and hoaxes. My web page version of this article contains a link <here> to the funniest anti-spam piece I ever read in my life, but it contains lots of VERY bad language, so you’ve been warned!Please help your friends and the Internet by never reacting to chain messages which urge you pass them on to other people. Beef up your own immunological system. Put them in the trash where they belong.
Subject FW (Fwd) Not AmusingFW THIS IS NOT A JOKE!How’s this?
Subject CANNED SODA DRINKS
Please read and forward to all.Whenever you buy a can of coke or any other canned soft drink,
please make sure that you wash the top with running water and soap or, if
not available, drink with a straw. A family friend’s friend died after
drinking a can of soda! Apparently, she didn’t clean the top before
drinking from the can.The top was encrusted with dried rat’s urine which is toxic and
obviously lethal!!!!! Canned drinks and other foodstuffs are
stored in warehouses in containers that are usually infested with rodents
and
then get transported to the retail outlets without being properly cleaned.Please forward this message to the people you care about…Thanks.Kim McKinney
Dept. for Public Health
564-6539
This entry was posted
on Saturday, October 23rd, 1999 at 8:16 pm and is filed under Commentary.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
CHAIN MAIL HOAXES
the anatomy of a social computer disease
Once you read this, you may never think about chain mail the same way again.
I just received a new surprise in my email yesterday. It spreads the gosh, believe-it-or-not “news” that a lady took a sip of a soft drink with a dirty can top and, what do you know, she died.
OK, I don’t believe it. This particular email is much cruder and more poorly documented than your average story about, say, alien abductions. Was there ever any connection between a lady sipping the soft drink and her death? Did something like this ever happened at all? Was the letter ever originated by a “real” person? We never established any of that.
The effectiveness of the letter depends completely on the credibility of the recipient. This letter bears all the classic hallmarks of a chain letter virus, a hoax, a scam spread by the cooperation of its victims.
Can Tops and Rat Droppings
It isn’t a bad idea to rinse off can tops, just like our mothers told us to. That’s the credibility bait. That’s not news. But the letter’s statement that rat urine “is toxic and obviously lethal” not only isn’t obvious, it just isn’t factual. Urine from healthy mammals may not smell great, but it’s medically sterile. This could be useful to know if someone on a lifeboat got disemboweled by a shark.Lifeboats not withstanding, the idea that a healthy human will certainly die, if they sip soft drinks contaminated with matter “usually” infesting all food cargo containers, is absurd.”A family friend’s friend died after drinking a can of soda! Apparently, she didn’t clean the top before drinking from the can.”"Apparently?” This “scientific” medical diagnosis claims to be from someone employed in “Dept. for (sic) Public Health”. The telephone number that makes it look “authentic” doesn’t even have an area code. The “Dept.” isn’t a municipal or county department such as Boston, or Cook County. This item is merely attributed to the “Dept.”So much for tracing the authenticity of the report.The alleged source here is one Kim McKinney of “The Dept”. Kim, if she exists at all, and if she actually works for a public health agency, never wrote this piece. “Obviously lethal”, for example, would be embarrassingly less than obvious to medics discussing the toxicological properties of rat urine. If she ever said anything like that, and her supervisors got wind of it, she could be reprimanded, or lose her job.
This was obviously second-hand hearsay, attributed to a fictitious person named Kim. After all, if you were really Kim, and you found out someone jeopardized your job by attributing this sloppy, unprofessional speculative rumor to you, wouldn’t you be pissed?
Yes, another fine piece of anonymous “expert” testimony. What can a reasonable person really know from reading it?
This one neglects to tell us whether the alleged victim was already 112 years old and had just fallen and broken her hip. Or, perhaps she had toxic shock syndrome and only needed a contaminated soft drink to push her system over the edge. Or, did she drink the soft drink in 1967 and die in 1992? Or, did she get distracted by rat pee while popping the lid, stall the car on the tracks, and get run over by AMTRAK?
Suspension of Disbelief
Think about it. If this “news” item had been exactingly specific about the causal connections here, it wouldn’t be news at all, would it? Hoax mail can’t afford to be too specific.Like UFO “incidents”, hoax mail “sensations” often hint at an official conspiracy to withhold complete public disclosure of the truth.We can’t tell you more, but that’s only because “they” won’t tell us. We demand to be told about the cover-up. If you join us, then they will have to tell us what they’ve been hiding from the public.
At this point, the average listener usually forgets to ask what proof we have at all that there’s ever been any cover-up in the first place. How does one know there’s evidence you don’t know about?
The popularity of mass hysterias and exploitative TV shows like “Great Mysteries” depends on a phenomenon that dramatists call “suspension of disbelief”. Shakespeare figured this out hundreds of years ago:
Something just happened on the stage (or in this email) that I don’t understand. But I’ve GOT to get past this, or I won’t be able to enjoy the play (or get the message).
Gee, what if the alleged rat’s alleged urine was diseased? How do you know an alleged microbe didn’t combine with an unknown deadly mutant ninja microbe to create an alleged new killer strain of allergens? You can’t prove that something DIDN’T happen.
You can’t prove the absence of a negative, but folks keep trying. You have to keep saying, “show me the evidence”, until folks get sick of you and wander off to badger a new potential listener.
People, by and large, are benevolent. By definition, we like our friends. We aren’t usually disposed toWANT to consider the possibility our inner circle is being duped, conned or scammed.
A solicitation from strangers may stand no chance, but the same solicitation from friends requires consideration and kid glove treatment. Chain mail exploits this relationship in an especially ugly way.
“I know this email they sent me is a little confusing, but … but no one would go to the trouble of sending it … if there wasn’t … there must be SOMETHING to it, or why would anyone send it?”
For the unwary, this approach is very credible, because, unfortunately, there really ARE cover-ups in officialdom. What’s a girl to think? Well, I suggest she should start, anyway.
Most of us can distinguish between the plausibility of a widely publicized government scandal, and, say, the demise of one real live obscure dead person whose lips may have touched dried rat pee-pee.
This planted soda pop “news” is designed to make us assume that the one alleged victim was young and in good health, with no history of medical problems or toxic reactions or allergies, and that she dropped dead on her first sip of the soft drink.
In other words, that if you did what she did, this would happen to you.
According to this logic, soft drink cans would be higher on the Surgeon General’s hit list than heroin or crack.
Computer “hoax” viruses, spread by well-meaning people, have become a serious social problem. It was inevitable that the proliferation of total BS would accompany the dawn of the information age. Like any other gossip, it’s a game played in every status of society and the professions.
Don’t be fooled or confused by the fact that this mail came from someone you probably know. Of course it did! You don’t catch flu outbreaks on distant continents unless there’s a local carrier. Real public health people call these individuals “vehicles”, “carriers”, agents” and “vectors”.
“Hi, I’m a friend of Kim, and I’ve just become infected by the soda pop hoax virus. I’m writing you because I thought that you, too, might like to join me in becoming infected.”
Just say “no” to virus vectors.
Virus Families
Computer virus technicians classify this kind of “harmless” hoax as a virus because it spreads exponentially. What’s the difference between hoax viruses and code viruses?
The fact that the “virus” jargon is the same, in both the computer network and the public health professions, is clearly no accident.
Having a hoax virus on your machine does no real harm until you forward it on to other machines. The damage is measured in wasted time and resources, just like the damage from code viruses.
The Numbers Game
The power of a code virus is measured in its ability to destroy data. The power of a hoax virus is measured in its ability to disable sound human judgment. Numerically, The hoax viruses are probably winning.
The chain-mail math is the killer. If 5 out of 10 recipients each forward to 10 other people, exactly half of whom forward to the next wave of people, in the 10th generation of recipients, the number of new recipients is only 38,000 — but 127,000 people have, cumulatively, already received junk mail at this point in the life cycle.That doesn’t sound so bad…
Most of these hoaxes are pretty crude, and hopefully die out pretty quickly. Let’s say, to get a different one started, you have to sucker people in by broadcasting it to a mailing list of 50 people, guessing that only 10% of the recipients might pass it along to an average of 2 people each.
That one dies out after only about 175 people have been annoyed. This is the happy decay point on the spreadsheet where the number of next-generation persons receiving a piece of mail dips below 1. There is a threshold of the chain-mail curve where fewer letters get regenerated on each successive wave.
The soda pop hoax virus letter is attached to the bottom of this article. It’s “just a letter” (plain ASCII text; no executable code) and won’t ever destroy any data. Its damage is done when a reader cooperates by sending it on to someone else.
Names and headers have been removed to protect the innocent. The copy I received was on about its fourth known generation (there could be other strains). It had reached about 50 recipients. The headers included the names of two known “repeat offenders”, people with a history of actively participating in the propagation of chain mail letters.
One of the offenders is pretty new to this game. The person who sent it to HIM has a track record like Typhoid Mary’s.
The math says there is a break-even curve for chain letters. Your decision not to forward such mail can put a big dent in the downstream infection.
You don’t even want to think about the numbers when the hoax is “really” believable, such as when it’s cute, and it promises love, good luck or money. This is the part of the curve where more than 50% of recipients are duped into passing it along to 5 or more people each, and the chain can last much longer. And you wondered why our Internet seems so slow.
My spreadsheet model says that if 60% of the recipients respond to only 5 more people each, we pass the numerical population of the United States at generation 17, and hit 24 trillion emails at generation 20.
In the real world, we would never get to the billions or trillions point on the curves. Servers and system software would suffer shutdowns way before that, people would be receiving and trashing copies of mail they just sent, systems people would strike back at the threat, and the virus would kill itself off by over-advertisement.
An endurable virus never kills off its host too soon. That’s why E.coli kills millions more humans than Ebola.
A “weak” virus, like the common cold, almost never kills its victims, but plagues mankind forever.
If it’s chain-mail, you’ll see the multiple-forward message headers. Forwarders don’t strip them off, because they ARE smart enough to know they don’t want to be blamed for originating the chain.
“Hey! I received this in the mail. Don’t know if it’s true or not. I just thought you (and 9 other people!) might be interested. So, see, I’m just forwarding it to you, but if you’re unimpressed, don’t blame me!”
If it’s chain mail, and it asks you to forward to many other people, and the information in it is unverifiable even if interesting, then it’s almost certainly a virus.
Don’t Walk the Walk, Don’t Talk The Talk
At the risk of being made to look unwilling to participate in a stampede, you should politely tell your sender (and only your sender, only if you know your sender) that you think it’s a virus. If you received it from a stranger, NEVER fall for the bait of replying to them.IF THEY PERSIST, there’s free antispam software you can use to filter out mail from those persons so you never have to look at it at all. Repeat offenders are on a power trip. If the reader likes playing along, it’s a free country, but you don’t have to play too.To avoid needlessly offending well-meaning or unthinking friends, you can just inform them you’ve installed anti-spam software. Tell them that important letters should never contain phrases like “please forward to all” because you might never get to see them.
“Typhoid Mary”
To tell you the truth: if any future message header contains the email name of the person I’ve now identified as “Typhoid Mary”, I’ve set up my Eudora mail filter to just trash it. That means that if he sends me mail, or if he sends you mail and you forward it to me, I simply won’t see it any more. You would have to edit out all the headers, or copy and paste the text you wanted to send to me … but common e-mail etiquette says you would do that for me anyway … wouldn’t you?But that means I can’t receive mail from this acquaintance any more! Surely there could be some less drastic solution, like me reading each email to see if I’m interested in it … don’t I owe that much to an acquaintance?Q: Say you’ve had this house guest drop in uninvited for years, and he has a serious drinking problem, and he always – count on it – gets sick on your rug and sofa. So you cut him off: no more visits when he’s been drinking. Wouldn’t that be placing a higher value on your rug and sofa than on your acquaintance?A: No, it would be placing a higher value on your rug and sofa than on the value of his drinking behavior. Replace the furnishings and get a life!
Inside Jokes and Old Hat
Many of the most enduring viruses warn you about the dangers of “new computer viruses”. They’re called “virus hoaxes”, though many other kinds of hoaxes also thrive on the Internet. There are so many of them that they have really become a great inside joke to people who know how to check up on them.Some of the funniest (and most unprintable) inside jokes on the Internet are currently about people who send email chain letters and hoaxes. My web page version of this article contains a link <here> to the funniest anti-spam piece I ever read in my life, but it contains lots of VERY bad language, so you’ve been warned!Please help your friends and the Internet by never reacting to chain messages which urge you pass them on to other people. Beef up your own immunological system. Put them in the trash where they belong.
Subject CANNED SODA DRINKS
Please read and forward to all.Whenever you buy a can of coke or any other canned soft drink,
please make sure that you wash the top with running water and soap or, if
not available, drink with a straw. A family friend’s friend died after
drinking a can of soda! Apparently, she didn’t clean the top before
drinking from the can.The top was encrusted with dried rat’s urine which is toxic and
obviously lethal!!!!! Canned drinks and other foodstuffs are
stored in warehouses in containers that are usually infested with rodents
and
then get transported to the retail outlets without being properly cleaned.Please forward this message to the people you care about…Thanks.Kim McKinney
Dept. for Public Health
564-6539
Article and analysis by Alex Forbes, ©September 11, 1999
Tags: community, junk mail, society
This entry was posted on Saturday, October 23rd, 1999 at 8:16 pm and is filed under Commentary. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.