It's a free service NOW, according to Stevenebin.
When I first got the spam, they wanted my name, address, ebay selling ID AND my credit card number.
To be honest, I was planning on giving them my information right after I finished bidding on that great Playstation 2 box and receipt being offered on ebay. What a deal!
Robin
[ edited by monkeysuit on Jan 26, 2001 02:40 AM ]
posted on January 26, 2001 02:57:11 AM Steve ... You are nothing but a SPAMMER! And no better than any other spammer, regardless of what they send in their spam.
Spam is not about content or desireability, spam is about THEFT of other people's resources for your own financial well-being, and it is about forcing recipients to subsidise your marketing campaigns. It's the method, not the content!
You carefully cite the laws that supposedly say spamming is legal, ignoring the states that prohibit it and the contracts you BROKE (contracts can ban a legal activity, and breaking that clause of the contract is still illegal). For example, owning dogs is legal, but as a landlord I can ban pets and evict people who break the lease.
Care to explain how you justify the following:
1. Violating your agreement with eBay to harvest the email addresses you spammed. Or buying that advertised CD from a scavenger who violated the agreement. Buying from someone who breaks contracts to scavenge their merchandise makes you unethical at best, or possibly just stupid. The "merchandise" was illegally obtained in either case.
2. Possibly violating the contract with your ISP to send the spam .... YUP, they did: "Register.com and Contractor consider most instances of unsolicited bulk email to be a theft of services and reserves the right to prosecute originators of same in a court of law," And your contractor is NET.PLANET who says: "Clients may not use NET PLANET's server for mass e-mail or "spamming" purposes"
3. If you didn't spam through NET.PLANET, you possibly stole services from an offshore relay so they could disguise the origin of the spam. I haven't seen the headers and have not recieved a copy of it yet, but this is a standard spammer method.
I doubt you sent that spam in the clear from your own email accounts ... that usually leads to a REAL SHORT online existence and a fried mail server.
4. (Possibly) lied about who it was from ... I'd be REALLY surprised if the bounce address and reply-to address was valid. REAL surprised.
And you want us have your (adjectives describing my feelings about spammers like Steve and his company deleted from her at the request of the moderator) company's logo on our auctions?
"the problem with cyber-auctions isn't that sellers are dishonest, it is that the biddders don't trust them. How many people do you know that are afraid to purchase on eBay?"
Well, according to surveys, IT'S FEAR OF GETTING SPAMMED that keeps a lot of people from buying on line. So you expect us to use the services of a (adjectives describing my feelings about spammers like Steve and his company deleted from her at the request of the moderator) spammer to convince people it's OK to buy from us?
"Like anything else SPAM can be good and bad. SPAM which advertises something which is considered a detriment, such as pornography, is certainly not desirable. On the other hand, SPAM which is considered helpful, such as a combat to fraud, is in my opinion desirable" "TRANSLATION: Spam that he thinks he can make money on is somehow less spammy than spam others think they can make money on. Amazing how the spammer mind works."
"The fact that it the service Free is certainly not irrelavent. From what I have been told, this is exactly what makes it legal. "
Well, if you have VENTURE CAPITAL, as you claim, you certainly plan to make money off this service soon, which makes your argument that it somehow makes the not spam suspect. Anyway, spam is not about intent to make money ... the endless "Jesus Saves" spams by the pious are just as much spam as yours was.
"because the seal can lead to a few rip-offs, certainly doesn't preclude the integrity which it represents"
SCAMMERS will do anything it takes to look respectable enough to pull off the scam. If it means buying and selling among dozens of phony IDS to get a good rating from you, and a seal of approval to lull the customers into feeling good, they'll do it! True scammers can spend 6 months setting up a 5-day scam, because they plan to make a LOT of money in that 5 days.
And after the first couple of times a buyer is ripped off by a seller who has your logo, and your company does nothing to reimburse the loss, and the stories start appearing on slashdot and in Salon you will be trashed as far as the net is concerned. and then you will be justanotherfaileddot.com who has nothing left to sell but their customers' email addresses and personal information.
49 out of 50 people increase their sales, and instill a sense of trust in their customers
Care to back that up with some hard data? Or do you expect us to trust a spammer?
"let me prevent other people from even manipulating the feedback system
By adding a statistical calculation with a bit of a trend analyser onto the easily manipulated feedback system? A calculation that can't even tell if the FB is for buying and selling? Or if the transactions were for cheap crap to pump up a feedback or for high-dollar merchandise? This is WIDE OPEN for scammers to manipulate for fraudulent purposes.
It's EXTREMELY EASY to LIE with statistics ... just watch the ads on TV to see how they do it.
"In terms of fitting the human psyche in a mathematical formula; it can certainly, certainly be done. I haven't come close to doing that, but it is important, from a philosophical standpoint, to be cognizant that everything originates in math, and as such everything can be explained through math. What goes up must come down. "
Pure unadulterated horse manure! What your mathematical manipulation of raw data does is produce statistics. And as a famous person once said: "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics." I suggest that you read the book titled "How to Lie with Statistics".
And you have some contradictory statements ... you say "Remember, that this company has only been in existance for 3 days", yet you say "The 5.5% response rate was when the service had cost $40" .... so in three days you already cut the price to 10% of the original? Or you spammed an offer earlier at $40 and had 5.5% response rate?
Domain Name: RELIABLEMERCHANTS.COM
Created on..............: Tue, Jun 27, 2000
Expires on..............: Wed, Jun 27, 2001
**********
UARU - ROFL
From the site:
Take these tips from ScamBusters to avoid bogus online items:
Don't buy if you hear about it via spam
*************
twinsoft
"This is a free service designed to protect eBay buyers by providing a rating"
NOPE ... it's a "free for now" service that is trying to convince SELLERS that it's going to improve our sales. Steve doesn't give a damn about the buyers ... he is here to convince sellers that paying for the logo will bring in more profits than the cost of the logo.
Edited becsue I screwed up the italics
[ edited by abacaxi on Jan 26, 2001 03:03 AM ]
Edited again because the moderator objected to the adjectives used to describe the spammer
[ edited by abacaxi on Jan 26, 2001 05:25 AM ]
AuctionWatch allows our members to ask relevant questions of company representatives. It's fine to have opinions about the message, but personal remarks about the messenger are simply not necessary. Please remember that company reps are to be treated with the same courtesy as any other AW member.
Another comment such as "So you expect us to use the services of a slime-ball address-scavenging spammer to convince people it's OK to buy from us?" will result in a formal call.
In other words, please keep the concept of basic etiquette in mind before you hit the "reply" button.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Linda
Moderator
(edit-add sentence)
[ edited by LindaAW on Jan 26, 2001 04:50 AM ]
posted on January 26, 2001 05:04:28 AMModerator LindaPlease remember that company reps are to be treated with the same courtesy as any other AW member.
Very true, but in defense it is hard to treat someone that harvests email addresses to send unsolicited offers with total respect. While I might not report every bit of spam I receive I sure won't reward it, and my respect for the company is seriously negative. It is hard to explain to a CEO or COO how wrong such a practice is without stepping on some toes.
posted on January 26, 2001 05:08:50 AM
Reliable Merchant's wonderful program awards a "Seal of Approval" and a 98.1% rating for Steven Ebin. Let's take a look at this...
Seller engaged in bid shilling / feedback padding.
Seller marketed bogus diet pills on Ebay. Quote from his "me" page: "This would accelerate genetic diversity by hastening weight-loss and taming kinetic appetites" Not a single repeat buyer and the only feedback from anyone that tried it came from a zero feedback user that is NARU and has one bid retraction. (most likely that auction)
Seller gouges buyers on shipping charges. $8.00 shipping for a software program.
Seller engages in email harvesting and spam.
....................
Now, if this person received a 98% approval rating from Reliable Merchants, just how horrible are the sellers with a 95% to 96% rating.
....................
As far as this BS about extrapolating data goes, there is nothing to extrapolate. You have total number of feedbacks and percentage of positive-nuetral-negative each assigned point values.
Now if you did a complete text search for the word shipping, and assigned two points for the word fast, one point for the word prompt, and subtracted two points for the word slow and came up with a shipping time reliability factor, that would be considered a complex rating system.
I guess since the get rich selling diet pills idea didn't pan out, this is your next attempt. Good Luck.
You are welcome to state your opinion of the company and/or their practices however the messenger is to be treated with the same respect as any other AW member.
posted on January 26, 2001 05:43:05 AM
MrJim -
Actually, if you apply the results of a real-time statistical analysis paradigm with some aggregate collaborative technologies inherent in its ability to implement scalable functionalities ... you end up with a formula that not only calculates the percent BUT does some sort of moving average calculation (or perhaps a slope analysis on the graph's last X points) to detect if a seller's trend is stable, up, or down.
All that means is the site is trying monetize old-hat statistics by clothing them in the guise of innovative methodologies, bleating about their ability to target integrated convergence and extend value-added solutions as they exploit customized markets.
I personally would only use a site that had the ability to extend scalable vortals and reintermediate virtual networks. It's the bleeding-edge dot-com infrastructure to enhance mission-critical channels and exploit e-business action-items.
posted on January 26, 2001 05:57:37 AM
Anyone taking any bets on how long this new .com will last? Don't you first have to have a NEED?
Am I clueless? Because I just don't see the purpose here. If I want to advertise my % for those people who don't take a gander at my feedback, I can easily do the math myself. I think my 278 Feedback speaks for itself.
posted on January 26, 2001 06:24:14 AMAnyone taking any bets on how long this new .com will last? Don't you first have to have a NEED?
It is sort of like selling a stick you put in your car's gas tank to see how much gas is in it. Their argument for selling it would be it is safer than lighting a match to see the level in the tank. If you send enough email spam you'll find a few challenged people that consider that a logical argument. No, I don't think they'll be around long.
posted on January 26, 2001 07:10:53 AM
A few simplistic observations:
- Do sellers really need another logo cluttering their auctions. May I remind you...KISS!!!
- Any buyer who relies solely on logos or "seals of approval", and I believe there are many, is a fool, IMHO.
- Matters not to me, and it shouldn't to you, if a seller displays logos for Power Seller, OAHU, verified user, or whatever new scheme comes along. I have always believed the feedback system to be an excellent indicator, and I still today believe it to be the best. One just has to be willing to do their homework.
- Free today. And, you all will be back in here moaning when they start charging for this, IMHO, unnecessary "service". You'll pay for this?
But yet, throw a hissy fit when eBay raises it's fees?
I applaud the young man's ingenuity, but I just don't see a need for this particular service.
posted on January 26, 2001 07:48:24 AM
Steven....
Boy some of these posters are harsh, but with all the hard times young people are going through...I truly commend you and wish you luck with your business. Spam is Spam is Spam....if you don't want to read it...take your little finger and delete it....sheesh, it really does not take that much effort (it takes much more effort to sit here and argue/complain about it). Don't sweat the little things!! Good luck!!!
posted on January 26, 2001 07:51:08 AM
Well, I've just spent an hour reading this thread and frankly don't see why everyone is so emotional. If you think it'll help try it, if not don't. My only opinion is that 50 FBs, and 3 months is too short. I would like to see at least 100 FB, and 6 months to make it more difficult to take advantage. I remember when I first hit 100 and my little star changed to a new color it took a while and I'm embarrassed to say I was very excited. Just my 2 pennies.
posted on January 26, 2001 08:31:44 AMI truly commend you and wish you luck with your business. Spam is Spam is Spam....if you don't want to read it...take your little finger and delete it....sheesh, it really does not take that much effort (it takes much more effort to sit here and argue/complain about it).
I don't know about you, but I avoid leaving my email around so it can be 'spammed'. Yes you can delete it, and delete it, and delete it, and delete it. I object to unethical business harvesting emails off of eBay because that email address is important to me.
What happens when you open your email and you've got spam for packing supplies, spam for online payments, spam for wholesale items, spam for auction software, spam for picture hosting, spam for... you get the picture I hope. If a business can profit from such tactics you'll eventually have to wade through your eBay email piece by piece sorting the spam from the buyers.
I would never commend, recommend, or wish well a business that used spam to introduce it's product. I find it the supreme irony in the 1st buyers tip they offer on their site.
http://reliablemerchants.com/articles5.html "Don't buy if you hear about it via spam"
posted on January 26, 2001 08:51:52 AM
Gosh you guys LIGHTEN UP!!
I agree with TammiAndy...HIT THE DELETE BUTTON! I get dozens of span a day...alot of them have eBay in the wording. I quit a long time ago of giving that stuff a second thought...I HIT DELETE!!
jayadiaz...also has a good point. 100 FB - 6 months would be a more reasonable expectation. If you can stick with it for 6 months and earn a 100 feedback your less likely to want to trash it by turning into a thief.
And finally...It is obvious to me this young lad has a lot a BRAINS to work with.
Lets give him some encouragement...instead of berating him.
So, he's young and just starting out, he is going to make mistakes. There is a RIGHT way and a WRONG way to point out these mistates, and from what I have read here I sure would'nt want to be a child of most of you.
In todays times of alcohol and drugs we need to encourage ours kids even with a half a brain...to be the best they can be and move forward.
They sure in the hell don't need to be berated.
WE NEED intellengent minds such as Steves for our furture well being.
He has an idea and he wants to cultivate it...as he himself said "I'm open for suggestions and criticism". He can learn from many of you...but putting him "down" is not the way to do it!
posted on January 26, 2001 09:09:21 AM
Packer...could not have said it better myself!!! We wonder why are young people are turning out the way they are. SOME OF US should be ashamed of ourselves......
posted on January 26, 2001 09:48:34 AM
Im almost ashamed I invited steven. But the great advice given him, in a businesslike manner with consideration to him as a human being trying to make something of himself and his idea outweighs the rudeness shown to him by some people here. I have been spammed so many dam times its pathetic. I normally dump them. This one, I clicked on for some reason I know not.
Steven, I will keep your logo, and hope you do take the advice magazineguy, amy, and many others have given you to IMPROVE what you started. I think you are to be commended for TRYING (albeit some mistakes). The logo will appear on my listings for now, and my fb speaks for itself. Good luck, and arrange a meeting with your other people to hunker down and study the good advice given here in this thread
posted on January 26, 2001 10:56:33 AM
Anyone taking any bets on how long this new .com will last?
I give it a week before the Ebay lawyers shut them down. Not because of the harvesting of email addresses which they openly admit in their press release. (see below) But because their site and service cannot operate without illegally pulling data from Ebay's servers. Assume they get a million users a day. Do you really think Ebay is going to pay for the servers to handle the feedback history requests coming from their site. This issue has already been tested in court and Ebay won.
Quote from Press Release on RM Website:
"In a pilot run 3,000 eBay merchants were contacted at random. An astonishing 5.5% of these people chose to sign-up for the service"
posted on January 26, 2001 11:33:11 AM
I made some comments last night and I was not being rude though some people may have taken it that way.
I am sure that lots of spammers deem their e-mail as "desirable" otherwise they wouldn't be sending it.
It is my job as a business person to ask where my contacts, suppliers, sales reps, etc. get my name and address. When I ask any one of them how they heard about me they are always forthcoming with the information (whether it is true or not). Not one of them has ever said "It is none of your business". If they did say that to me I really don't think I would want to do business with them.
Yes, this young man is well-spoken and obviously has great intelligence. I wish him well with his endeavors. I do think he is doing some things the "wrong way" though.
posted on January 26, 2001 12:10:55 PM
I think he is doing things wrong, too. But thats why hes here, and why he stayed here. To learn. And perhaps he did show his age for just a moment there, by saying it was none of our business where he got the emails. Just like when my son said the same thing at 17 when I asked where the hell he was til 2 in the morning. Keep it in mind that he did stay, and he did try to answer, and he did pay attention as well as show just a wee bit of ire, which is human.
I, too, made note of things said in this thread, so therefore, I will keep the logo and hang in there with them, but I think I will add alittle blurb underneath said logo, along the lines of "ALWAYS check feedbacks of the person you are considering dealing with, ask questions, and read all policies before bidding. Logos are just that...logos. Be safe and protect your interests".
I have no fear of using his logo or belonging to RM because I have nothing to worry about concerning my integrity or honesty. It doesnt hurt to have it there, there it will stay until it DOES hurt.
posted on January 26, 2001 12:36:41 PM
MrJim -- I really do't have time if you are all going to be attacking me. I can answer questions and defend my honesty, but refuse to wage a war.
In defense of my honesty:
I engaged in feedback padding on my first week on eBay, when I was 15 years old, with a friend in school. Not only was I unfamilliar with the eBay rules, but I was encouraged to do so by my friend. i regret what I did, and it certainly wasn't with malicious intent. I was a little kid, new to eBay, and a friend encouraged me. Heavens.
Next, i didn't market bogus diet pills on eBay. The about me page is a JOKE. I believe that anybody reading my about me page will realize that it is a JOKE!!!
Third, the $8 for shipping was substatially reduced for MS Windows Millenium (TM), Please see the reflecting positive feedback where the bidder acknowledges that I reduced the price even though he hadn't asked me to -- and thanks me for it.
Finally, you don't know if whether I engaged in email harvesting, so don't accuse me of it.
So -- Am I a rose? Certainly not. i made a mistake when I was in school on my first week on eBay and regret doing so. End of story. the ret of my transactions went well, and I deserve a 98% rating.
posted on January 26, 2001 12:47:08 PM
Good grief. When I logged off last night I had no idea this was going to be a slug-out. What is it about a new idea that poses the irresistable urge for some to go for the jugular?
How many threads are posted here almost daily bemoaning negative news coverage and how it has people frightened to death to even LOOK at an auction, let alone bid on one? How many of you have criticized the failure of bidders to review FB *before* bidding?
The fact is, many bidders either don't know FB exists, don't care about FB until it's too late, or don't want to take the extra time to go to the separate FB page.
RM offers a way for bidders to see, right on the auction page, that the FB numbers of a particular seller are at least 95% positive, knowledge that many never took time to know before.
RM isn't a replacement for FB, but rather a supplement to it.
Having said that, it remains to be seen whether it has any impact on bidding. It certainly can't hurt, though, and I for one will try it before condemning it.
posted on January 26, 2001 01:09:41 PM
Initially I came here for Criticism and Suggestions.
I received both, and so, I am GLAD that I arrived. I know that none of you were acting with malicious intent when you criticized the service or my history. Hence, I am glad that I received CONSTRUCTIVE criticism, from guru’s.
Joining this discussion was not a waste. Au Contraire, through your comments and suggestions I was able to compile a list of modifications, which will be helpful to the site. The motto, after all, reads: “It’s the customer, stupid!”
Below is a cumulative list of revisions, which you all helped make:
1. Stop the SPAM - though there are some people on the board who appreciated receiving it, many others were vexed by it.
2. Eliminate all mentions of fees - it is confusing to browse through a site which contains contradictions. Since there are no fees, there should be no mention of a fee.
3. Suspension of users - Clearly state that users will be suspended if they vitiate below the accepted threshold, which is currently a score of 95%
4. Imperfection - Openly acknowledge that the ReliableMerchant system is not perfect.
5. Limitation of dependability - ENCOURAGE BIDDERS TO BROWSE THROUGH THE EBAY(TM) FEEDBACK RATING, aa well as the ReliableMerchants reliability rating.
6. Be Cordial at all times
7. Consider instating a clause in the system, that one cannot join unless the user has been registered with eBay for 6+ months, rather than 3+ months.
8. Consider instating a clause in the system, that one cannot join unless one has 100+ feedbacks, rather than 40+
9. Welcome the possibility of evaluating the ‘texture’ of the feedback comments, by parsing through every comment.
10. Edit text on the web-site where the text needs to be edited - An example of this was provided by Amy, “rest-assured, fully reliable”.
11. Consider distinguishing between comments left by a bidder, and comments left by a seller.
12. Update the TOS
13. Begin playing Nintendo (suggestion by maumimoods)
14. Have additional investigations to prevent Scammers!
15. Consider evaluating non-unique feedbacks as well (controversial)
16. Under all circumstances, maintain the integrity of the seal! (Suggestion by Amy)
17. Stress that the eBay system has its purpose. (Amy)
posted on January 26, 2001 01:19:21 PM
I knew I liked you, Steven, at the first email I recieved from you when I asked for a sample of someone using your services (and a speedy reply, I might add).
Hug your mom for me, will ya? She did good She must be very proud of you.
Yes...play more nintendo while juggling your dreams and ideas. Be young as long as you can, k?
posted on January 26, 2001 01:34:10 PM
I'm reading this thread, then I come to the following post, which I'll annotate, you have some REAL stones, Little Steven-
<<< stevenebin
posted on January 25, 2001 08:44:19 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shaani -- you accuse RM of harvesting email addresses from eBay yet you don't know how RM got the email addresses. It is simply not your business how we got the email addresses, but suffice it to say that it was done in a fully legal manner, in accordance with State and Government statures. >>>
SO, let me get this straight... You run a "service" that rates eBay users for their reliability, and purports to be able to mathematically predict users' reliability in the future. I won't go into the apparent flaw of making a 1 to 1 correlation of anything but RAW DATA in any algorithm, what I would do IF I WERE REALLY INTERESTED would be to ask you how you verified the probable accuracy of your "algorithm" IF you did (I crunched numbers for 2 Fortune 500 Companies in my previous life)> BEFORE this post, I just might have cared. NOW? Unh uh. You have the colossal GALL to harvest email addresses, then reply to users who ask how that it's not their business JUST BECAUSE
you did it in a "legal manner," and in "accordance with State and Government statutes"???? Lemme give you some news. There is a matter of ETHICS here. Just because something is LEGAL DOES NOT mean that it is ethical, and MANY, MANY people think that you harvesting email addresses by whatever "legal" method you do so is UNETHICAL. You are not the proponent of some greater good, you are a kid with an idea and (apparently) some money backing you, doing what you're doing FOR ONE PURPOSE- to make yourself money. That's fine, however your business plan sets out to do so. But when you answer someone who asks you where you got their email address with "none of your business," you have crossed the line.
<<<Next, the Spamming is legal as well. In accordance with the following:
Netizens protection act of 1997 (HR 1748 105th congress), Consumer Internet Privacy Protection act of 1997 (HR 98 105th Congress), and finally, the Data Privacy act of 1997 (HR 238 105th Congress)
-------->>>
Same response to the legality of what you're doing as above.
<<<In essense, SPAM is illegal if it is for commercial purposes -- Sign-Up is FREE. Supplement this, with the fact that the email advertises integrity, and you get one very legal SPAM.>>>
My GAWD, who do you think you're talking to, CHILDREN? Your are running this business as a DOT ORG in the public interest not for commercial profit, PRESENT OR FUTURE? Gimme a break.
<<<Do you think I would have let SPAM be sent out, without prior approval from lawyers? Do you think I would send out SPAM if I thought it would marr the sites credibility? >>>
NO to question 1, an answer which is irerelevant to any issue of right and wrong, and a RESOUNDING YES to question 2, since some of your answers on this board have IMHO SERIOUSLY marred the site's (and your) credibility.
And to address another issue- You say you
won't sell user info to anyone else? Gimme YET ANOTHER break.
1. That info will be part of ANY merger and/or acquisition.
2. Why do you feel it necessary to assure users of something YOU CAN'T POSSIBLY
promise? The user agreement gives you the right to sell or disemminate this info, and if you have so little regard for user info as to tell people that it's none of their business how you got their email address, WHY IN HADES SHOULD ANYONE BELIEVE THAT YOU CARE ENOUGH ABOUT THEIR PRIVACY WHEN IT COMES TO YOUR OWN PROFIT THAT YOU WILL KEEP YOUR EMPTY PROMISE?
<<<My apologies if Ii came down to hard.
- Steven >>>
posted on January 26, 2001 01:51:57 PM
<<< stevenebin
posted on January 26, 2001 01:38:30 PM new
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tentwentytwo -- I am sorry, but I will not respond to your posting, because of the last word.
>>>
You think that my purpose in posting what I posted was to elicit a response from you? WRONG. I will tell you one thing though. I've gotten your email 3 times. The first time I opened it and read 2 lines, then deleted it. The second time I just deleted it. The THIRD, I replied with instructions NOT TO SEND IT TO ME AGAIN. REPEATED mailings (either emails or snail mails) are one of my pet peeves, and I'm far from alone in that opinion. It's the principle "we'll annoy someone repeatedly until they respond," DESPITE the fact that once should be quite enough, do you think that just because it costs you virtually ZERO to send REPEATED emails that you SHOULD be doing it???
I'll tell you here- DO NOT send me any more of your COMMERCIAL SPAM, which is EXACTLY
what your email is, DESPITE your protestations to the contrary. Good luck to anyone who wants it, good luck to anyone who signs up for your service, even good luck to you with this company if it's just not another DOT.COM get rich quick (or slowly) scheme. I don't want to hear about it vis-a-vis me using it, and that stance comes directly from your apparent disdain for my rights of privacy, however trite that might seem to you, or however that might not jibe with any violations of ethics that you learned in Ethics 101.
how wrong such a practice is without stepping on some toes.