"notbob" > wrote in message
...
> On 2006-06-21, Steve Wertz > wrote:
>
>> Nice article. Spam, but still pertinent, at least. For anybody
>
> Gotta disagree, this time. One paragraph in, it was blantantly
> obvious
> this was just spam fluff.

I'll grant you that it's fluff, but I'm confused, inexperienced as I am,
as to why it is spam. He doesn't seem to advertise anything. I thought
spam was always some sort of advertising.