Who is Lance Winslow and What is He Talking About?
An MXL co-worker (Thanks, Grant!) directed me to this blog posting by a guy named Lance Winslow titled "SPAM Killing Small Business Productivity". It is no surprise to anyone that any small business that has not taken steps to protect their infrastructure with some kind of anti-spam/traffic shaping/traffic control device or service (I am partial to the managed service form factor, BTW :) ) is feeling the effects of the amount of spam flying over the internet on a daily basis. So, in that respect Lance hasn't started off his post with anything revolutionary.
Then things start to get weird...
Lance states "...the Federal Trade Commissions; FTC’s war on SPAM is killing small businesses and flooding their inboxes with junk mail". What?! Last I checked, a LOT more people than just who are involved in the FTC are fighting spam on a daily basis and doing a pretty decent job of it. I work with many of them on a daily basis both at MX Logic and at our many competitors. Secondly, how is the FTCs war on spam killing small businesses and flooding inboxes with junk mail? Last I checked, that was the spammers who were responsible for that....oh yeah, and the infected PCs that they use to do their dirty work. I'll concede that CAN-SPAM hasn't done much, but spam hasn't increased as a result of CAN-SPAM. Spam has increased due to money chasing criminals using spam as a vehicle to make money.
Lance then goes on to say "America Online indicated that it culls 75% of the incoming SPAM thru filters and many other companies are able to do this too. But what if you are a small business which does not have such features on your website? What do you do then? You cannot do a thing." Strike 2! Firstly, I know quite a few of the anti-spam folks over at AOL personally and I'll be more than happy to publicly defend them and say that I am sure they are catching more than 75% of incoming spam. If that were MX Logic's catch rate I surely would have been fired years ago! It certainly hasn't been my looks that has gotten me by! :) Further, how can Lance ascertain that there is nothing you can do if you do "not have such features on your website"? I am going to guess that he is really referring to inboxes here and not web sites (as web sites are a bit of a different animal than what he originally started out his post with). Has he ever looked into the cost of a Managed Security Service or a network appliance? Anyone can deploy anti-spam defenses at fairly low cost per user. The cost can even be free if you are willing to do the work yourself to maintain your own installation of a software based service like Spamassassin.
His final paragraph states "A concocted report from MX Logic purports that SPAM is down a whopping 9%? If you believe that you are on drugs just like the FTC. If you are a small business getting 300 junk mails per day, obviously this is not going to help you in the least as it still means you are getting over 275 junk mails a day. Worse the figure of nine-percentile is said to be a complete misrepresentation and convenient fabrication." Perhaps Lance should do a bit more reading about the decline in spam volumes since the shutdown of McColo back on November 11th (although I do appreciate that he is reading our report!). Although the botnets that were originally debilitated as a result of the McColo shutdown are back online, spam volumes overall are still down from where they were pre-McColo. Now, I will agree with Lance's point where he said that if you were getting 300 spam emails per day and are still getting anywhere from around 275 per day, you are still getting deluged (perhaps our sales folks should try to sell Lance an anti-spam solution :) ). At a micro level this doesn't seem like a big deal, but when looked on a much more macro scale in an environment like ours and other major ISPs who process hundreds of millions of emails per day, the effects are dramatic.
I'm curious as to what authority he stands on or interviewed to make the statement that drops in spam volume are a "complete misrepresentation and convenient fabrication" ? How is saying that spam volumes are down convenient for us? In our business, spam sells. The more there is, the better sales numbers grow as businesses become more aware of the inadequacies of their own systems in trying to manage spam themselves. They realize that they NEED an alternative so that they can focus on their core competencies and not just on keeping their mail servers online. As a result, crises and large spam events like the CNN outbreak from back in August are great for our sales numbers. It certainly makes selling the need for a solution easier on them. I've been accused during media interviews by less tech savvy reporters of trying to spread FUD because "I have to say that spam volumes are up because fighting spam is the business that we are in", but never that I'm lowering numbers for convenience. I don't quite see how that argument makes any sense.
The closing of his post is the coup de gras: "If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance." I would certainly say that Lance's perspectives are unique (and completely uninformed), but his thoughts are not quite so innovative (however quite imaginative!).
Posted by smasiello at 3:40 PM | Link | 7 comments
Comments
Re: Who is Lance Winslow and What is He Talking About?
I'd expect something like that to come with a closing statement on why his seriously expensive on site network assessment is worth every penny. It's very rare (at least for me) to see someone spout off something so seriously out of touch with facts and reality without it being a sales pitch. I'd love to sit in on a meeting of that online think tank he's a reported member of. :)
Posted by Charles Decker on January 5, 2009 at 10:01 AM
Re: Who is Lance Winslow and What is He Talking About?
If you really wanted to know to discuss this you could have emailed me, god knows I am easy to get ahold of, and I think you read too much in a small 250-word article. I've argued both sides, that was one of 15,000 articles I've written. But, it's good to talk about this stuff. Defending the anti-SPAM industry is smart if you are in the business. Yes, I have good Spam software, but you have to admit that the FTC spent six months defining SPAM before prosecuting any cases, it was pretty ramped during that time. That article was written an awefully long time ago, the cite you have comes from someone who picked up that old article and placed it on their blog.
If you'd like we can have an intellectual continuation of this dialogue in the present period, now. Things change fast online, we should discuss current events, that was an older article.
If you'd like we can have an intellectual continuation of this dialogue in the present period, now. Things change fast online, we should discuss current events, that was an older article.
Posted by Lance Winslow on January 5, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Re: Who is Lance Winslow and What is He Talking About?
Found the article here it is:
http://ezinearticles.com/?SPAM-Killing-Small-Business-Productivity&id=118360
At the bottom of the article you will see the original article was written on December 25 2005. In 2005 would we be having this same dialogue? or would we agree that the FTC's failure at that point to Act Decisively, was hurting small business? I think that debate would favor my contention, but you would not have to have defended your position at that time, as you probably would have agreed with me.
So, we are in what 2009 now? So that was just over 3-years ago. That's a long time ago in Internet years. In fact, one of the recent Ted Conferences a gentleman from Google was discussing all the changes in the last 5-years and projecting that in 5 more years we will not even recognize the Internet.
So, I agree that the article I wrote in 2005 is NOT relevant. I cannot believe anyone picked up that old article to post on their website, but maybe that is another issue entirely, obviously the guy who posted that article on their make-shift blog, merely wanted to find articles with certain key words in order to capture ridiculous AdSense trickle revenue.
http://ezinearticles.com/?SPAM-Killing-Small-Business-Productivity&id=118360
At the bottom of the article you will see the original article was written on December 25 2005. In 2005 would we be having this same dialogue? or would we agree that the FTC's failure at that point to Act Decisively, was hurting small business? I think that debate would favor my contention, but you would not have to have defended your position at that time, as you probably would have agreed with me.
So, we are in what 2009 now? So that was just over 3-years ago. That's a long time ago in Internet years. In fact, one of the recent Ted Conferences a gentleman from Google was discussing all the changes in the last 5-years and projecting that in 5 more years we will not even recognize the Internet.
So, I agree that the article I wrote in 2005 is NOT relevant. I cannot believe anyone picked up that old article to post on their website, but maybe that is another issue entirely, obviously the guy who posted that article on their make-shift blog, merely wanted to find articles with certain key words in order to capture ridiculous AdSense trickle revenue.
Posted by Lance Winslow on January 5, 2009 at 11:34 AM
Re: Who is Lance Winslow and What is He Talking About?
Lance Winslow is this you?
Wow, interesting stuff their with the FTC Lance. Really helps your credability:
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/08/carwashcmpt.htm
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2001/03/carwash2.shtm
Wow, interesting stuff their with the FTC Lance. Really helps your credability:
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/08/carwashcmpt.htm
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2001/03/carwash2.shtm
Posted by Sunny in Kansas City on February 26, 2009 at 11:35 PM
Re: Who is Lance Winslow and What is He Talking About?
This one takes the cake Lance:
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/260548.php
According to that one Lance is superman, Obama, MLK, God and Ghandi all in one.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/260548.php
According to that one Lance is superman, Obama, MLK, God and Ghandi all in one.
Posted by Sunny in Kansas City on February 26, 2009 at 11:41 PM
Re: Who is Lance Winslow and What is He Talking About?
Lance Winslow is the Internet's most prolific psuedo intellectual. He's like an unfunny Jack Handy. You have to read his dissertation (ha!) on "What is Unlimited Thought". It's a hoot!
http://www.worldthinktank.net/pdfs/limitlessthought.pdf
http://www.worldthinktank.net/pdfs/limitlessthought.pdf
Posted by Mobiustrip on March 28, 2009 at 9:28 PM
Re: Who is Lance Winslow and What is He Talking About?
For my detractors above, first, read this:
http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/franrulestaffrpt/OL-100001.pdf
Secondly, this attempt to smear my name will not work, as anyone who researches this smear tactic will see that in 2005 the article in question that I wrote was 100% accurate. We have a serious problem in this nation and on the Internet when folks go around smearing others while hiding behind anonymity (so called Sunny in Kansas City or Mobiustrip, what is up with this anti-Lance slander campaign, nothing better to do). Further on this ACE MU site, they seem to have 100s of people posting under my name, when I have never posted there? Any company that would allow this sort of nonsense on its Corporate Blog is indeed questionable and fostering slander. I'm not impressed, nor should anyone else be.
http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/franrulestaffrpt/OL-100001.pdf
Secondly, this attempt to smear my name will not work, as anyone who researches this smear tactic will see that in 2005 the article in question that I wrote was 100% accurate. We have a serious problem in this nation and on the Internet when folks go around smearing others while hiding behind anonymity (so called Sunny in Kansas City or Mobiustrip, what is up with this anti-Lance slander campaign, nothing better to do). Further on this ACE MU site, they seem to have 100s of people posting under my name, when I have never posted there? Any company that would allow this sort of nonsense on its Corporate Blog is indeed questionable and fostering slander. I'm not impressed, nor should anyone else be.
Posted by Lance Winslow on May 17, 2009 at 11:12 PM
