🚀 go-pugleaf

Persons should utilize the most extreme caution in responding to
an article that has appeared suddenly in many newsgroups.  The
posting  was supposedly placed by a "Kathy Sorkin", at <facepl@aol.
com>.  This advertisement has the purported intent of attracting 

>...Wacky, creative kids, aged 6-13.

The actual message in the post is nebulous, although it does state,

>...We want kids who have used creativity to invent something or 
>do something TOTALLY DIFFERENT.

Nowhere is there any mention of how answering the ad in question 
will benefit the parents or children who are naive enough to reply.

After I read the posting, I was curious, so I visited the website 
for "Ms. Sorkin"'s company at the address provided by the post.
The website itself was very thin, and almost as "informationally
skimpy" as the USENET spam.   As with the USENET article, no mention
was made of anything that would benefit the children or the parents
who contacted FACES AND PLACES, INC, "Ms. Sorkin"'s" company.  The
websited did claim that this firm was a reasearch company, provid-
ing information to many big-name companies which were listed at the
website.

The funny thing was, when I clicked on the dots to see what kind
of "research" was provided to these corporations by FACES AND 
PLACES INC., nothing happened.  It was just a list of company names 
and nothing else!  (I might add that IF indeeed these corporations 
are clients of FACES AND PLACES, INC., they should take a very hard
look at having their names associated with any organization that 
has exhibited such contempt for the USENET community at large by
spamming its parasitical pitches in a manner entirely contrary to
the charters of most, if not all, of the newsgroups wherein the 
offending ad appeared.)

In other words, if one is to interpret the website information 
though the terminology of contemporary business practice, one
must conclude that "Ms. Sorkin" and her FACES AND PLACES, INC is
(at best!) violating the charter of USENET itself and of many 
specific newsgroups by trying to sucker parents to give her
research information about their children--which "Ms. Sorkin"
will sell to private companies at a profit.

IF indeed that is ALL the person in question is up to (and that is 
the "best case scenario") I strongly suggest that she grow some
ethics  and stop freeloading off USENET, which was not created 
to be  an electronic servant of leeches like "Kathy Sorkin".
Legitimate research companies have many honorable options avail-
able to them for the conscientious gathering of information.  
They can hand out fliers in malls to attract research subjects,
they can use direct mail pitches, they can advertise through 
periodicals, they can use direct phone calling to persons who
will accept their intrusions, and they can use commercial 
electronic media.  But all these venues involve some expendi-
ture, and clearly "Kathy Sorkin" has unfortunately picked on 
USENET as a way to feeload the information she wants to sell.

Certainly, when legitimate research companies respect the rights
of others, they deserve full consideration as a provider of a
valuable business service.  But they don't have a right to
insinuate themselves into USENET and con gullible parents and 
children with  phony little "cheerfully toned" messages that 
are in fact disguised commercial pitches wholly OUT of charter--
and totally IN netiquette violation.

Again, it must be stressed that what I have said above is a 
"best case scenario".  It applies ONLY if "Ms. Sorkin" is 
indeed what her website claims. I have no idea if that is the
case, because there have been many reported instances of 
criminal organizations using vague come-ons of the type that
appeared in the "CALLING ALL KIDS" message as bait so the
posters can find victims to prey on in one way or another.
I have no compunctions about suggesting that our fishy "Ms. 
Sorkin" may in fact be a front for something extremely 
sinister.

But even if "Kathy Sorkin" is merely what she claims, she fully
deserves the censure of the entire USENET community for misusing
her newsgroup privilege.

I know that many readers will not need this warning, and that
what I have said above will seem rather obvious to some who have
perused the "CALLING ALL KIDS" posting. But since so many
"newbies" are logging onto the Net every day--and because 
children are involved here--I sincerely feel that my comments
are warranted.