Almost all of us internet users experience problems with unwanted email.  I call it Spam, but the industry has defined Spam so that once again we the users are put at the mercy of these unscrupulous senders.

In my search for what is considered Spam I went to the Monster Board.  The Monster Board has acknowledged that they are having security problems with unscrupulous individuals and/or "businesses".

Quoting from Monster Security Center on the definition of Spam:

"Spam is unsolicited bulk email. Not all bulk email is spam. Not all commercial email is spam. Email must be unsolicited and bulk in order to be spam. Unsolicited email is email the recipient did not (explicitly or implicitly) agree to receive. If the recipient agreed to receive it, then it is not spam.

Bulk email can be split into two categories: Opt-in and Opt-out. Opt-in is email that an individual requested or agreed to receive. Many legitimate mailers use opt-in methods for marketing. Individuals are responsible for reading and understanding a company's privacy policies and acceptable use policies (if applicable) before submitting an email address. If a privacy or acceptable use policy clearly states that signing up for the service results in receiving marketing or commercial email, then the individual has "opted-in" to receive email and that email is not spam. Individuals also implicitly opt-in for email regarding a purchase or transaction; for example, when buying an airline ticket via the web, the purchaser receives an emailed purchase confirmation, which is not spam. With opt-out email, the sender adds an email address to a mailing list without prior consent, then asks the recipient to request removal (or "opt-out") if he does not want to continue to receive email. Opt-out email is unsolicited and is by definition spam.

Spam is bulk email. If someone writes to an individual personally, one-on-one, to ask a question or inquire about a post made to a newsgroup or website, then that is not spam, even if it contains commercial or marketing content. However, email containing the recipient's name is not always legitimate. For example, if someone writes a personalized message, but fails to address any subject which is specific or relevant to the recipient ("Kelly, get the lowest prices on prescription drugs!" is an example), it is safe to assume the message is spam."

Let’s examine the definition for problems that we users have.

I personally have experienced situations while "surfing" the internet concerning "opt-in" emails; I see an item that I want to know more about.  The page owners are smart and ask fairly mundane questions which when answered (to get to the bottom line) flip you to another page that shows it is a come on.  I’ve canceled that page, but it’s too late!  I am now a recipient who has agreed to receive it!!!!  Is it fair and ethical? No!  Is it deceptive? Yes!  What can be done about it?  Well, when the unwanted e-mails start in some cases we can "opt out" with some of these emails.  This can be a problem in itself as it is an indication that you have opened and read the e-mail and now more e-mails come.  It’s like a "self-eating watermelon", it just doesn’t stop!

By the definition of Spam email above, an "opt out" email is Spam. 

The first paragraph in the quoted definitions above says, "Spam is unsolicited bulk email. Not all bulk email is spam."   Yet the third paragraph starts with, "Spam is bulk email."  Sound confusing?  It is very confusing.  My personal feelings are that bulk email should be stopped.  

These "businesses" are using deceptive practices to get our money and in the process are destroying what is a very good tool, the internet.  They do not care about us or the internet.  Their only care is making money.  They do not concern themselves with what is ethical, just like Enron did.

In other cases; when you use that "unsubscribe or opt out button" it demands your ID#.  I experienced such email and the problem was that I did not have an ID#; therefore, could not access their system to get the email stopped.

You can report the emails, but actually what have you accomplished when you do?  Can you imagine how many emails that legitimate companies get concerning fraudulent email?  It must be overwhelming.

You can just ignore the email and delete it.  Unfortunately that does not stop future emails from the "business".  I experienced a problem with one company that was sending me email two to three times a day - each and every day for weeks until I found some "directors" of that company and contacted them!  It took several days and several emails with some beautiful pictures of space taken via the Hubble telescope attached to my emails to them. That got their attention and the unwanted email stopped.  I certainly would not recommend using attachments, but in this case I had tried every other way available to me.

There are other email practices that are becoming more and more prevalent today.  The terms applied to them are "phishing" and "spoofing".  These types have one thing in common.  The "˜from address’ makes it look like it is coming from someone or somewhere who has a legitimate reason for contacting you.

Phishing email will usually ask you to go to another web-site that asks you for personal or account information.  Even worse, it can introduce malicious software to your computer system.  In many cases a phish email will include false statements to get immediate reaction form recipients.

Spoofing emails many times will offers employment or an invitation to act as a go between for processing payments or money transfers. 

Then there is another category of email that is considered a nuisance, but not Spam.  These are the ones that are like the chain letters that were and still are sent by land mail.  The US Post Office has attempted to stop these types of "snail" mail.  When will the internet do the same?  In an attempt to stop these types of email coming to me, I usually will email the sender and request that I not be included for this type of email.

The USA passed a law in January 2004 called the CAN-SPAM Act that requires all unsolicited commercial email to carry an unsubscribe mechanism and a physical address for the sender.  The CAN-SPAM act requires that an individual be removed from a mailing list upon request within 10 working days.

In the Monster.com information on how to guard against Spam they have a statement that bears upon this discussion:

"A recipient should be cautious if he receives email from an unknown organization or a known organization without any prior communication, as following the removal instructions in the spam may result in more spam. By using the removal instructions, the recipient verifies that he received the spam and read it. That makes the email address more valuable to the spammer, and the recipient may get more spam."

It is readily apparent that in some cases requesting removal actually gets one more Spam.  So what can we do?

Be careful in your use of the internet!  If something appears to good to be true, treat it as such and delete it.  Use your internet search engine look up the sender’s company and ask them if they are aware of the Spam you have received.  Most legitimate companies will welcome information regarding misuse of their companies’ name.

Good luck and safe surfing.

Years ago when our children were younger we had some cows.  We had bought a small herd of Herefords and we were ready to get into the cow business.  While we were fencing our property the cows were kept on leased land next door to a fine Angus bull.  That bull took a shine to our Herefords; I suppose it was the color that drew him to our cows because the attraction was so great that no fence would keep him from visiting.

Nature took its course and several of our Herefords got in the family way.  The results were that we have several black with white face calves.  This was fine, but one of the Herford mother cows just did not want her baby.  I wonder if that the calf’s color influenced her decision to abandon the calf proving that cows are not color blind.

Anyway, one truly yucky wet evening I (with a lot of urging from the children) decided to bring the calf back to our place and bottle feed it.  We had not brought a rope or other equipment to catch the calf, but she had been fairly complacent with us previously.  Fearless to the extreme we proceeded to "surround" the calf.  The calf seemed to realize that things were different and proceeded to move away.

Undaunted, I made a flying leap to catch the calf and did so!  Unfortunately the soggy ground also was dotted with several fragrant piles of methane production material and I sorta slid my way through them.

The smell did not deter me from my mission and after securing the calf in our pick-up I turned to my family expecting more than the snickers and nose holding reception I received.  This was just not acceptable to me, a champion and a conquering hero who had faced danger; therefore, I proceeded to catch and hug each of my children until they were as fragrant as I.  I believe that the families who smelled alike are closer with unbreakable bonds between them.

The calf, Bandit (due to a black streak across her white face), became an integral member of the family who bellowed when she wanted the bottle and attention.  Attention with three children was not in short supply.  The children sorta spoiled her.

The Katrina situation in New Orleans is a natural and "man made" disaster of the highest magnitude.  We all feel for the people whose lives were wrenched apart by this terrible act of nature.  Is nature the only one to blame?

New Orleans is below sea level and it was only a matter of time until something like this happened.  It is time that we took a close look at what really caused this disaster besides the fierce act of nature and decide what we can do to mitigate this from happening again.

Let’s look at the facts of New Orleans as a building site.  Number one on the list is that it is below sea level and subject to flooding.  Building was somewhat restricted, but in truth developers could and did circumvent the intent of the laws to further develop in this definite risk to flooding area. 

It must be admitted that to build in a flood prone area is not in ones best interest and the Katrina disaster proves just how much of a folly it was.  Was New Orleans a single one-of-a-kind area that felt the force of nature?  No.  Nature has proved in the past that this can happen and it has happened elsewhere. 

Galveston, Texas was in a low lying barrier island area that was hit by hurricanes which killed many people and destroyed property.  Indianola, Texas was hit not just once but a second time both times with great loss of property and life.  Galveston was rebuilt; however, Indianola was never rebuilt after the second disaster.  These two examples are not isolated bits of fiction, they are facts and there are many other coastal areas in the United States which provide similar accounts.

These facts attest to the fact that as the buyer is cautioned to beware, the builder must beware.

Is the Federal Government to be blamed?  Certainly, the lacks of timely and decisive action places a lot of the blame on them, but are they in truth the culprit?  The answer is no.  Blame for inaction and tremendous waste of money is justified and inexcusable.

Is it the State Government to be blamed?  Certainly, when it has came to light that money allocated for the levies was used in other ways places a large share of blame on them.   So are they responsible for the loss of life and property?  They cannot deny that their personal greed and lack of proper care to the levies certainly enhanced the possibility of the flooding that occurred.  In addition, the State of Louisiana actively courted businesses to locate in the New Orleans area which only compounded the problem.

Is it the local Government to be blamed?  Certainly, their lack of positive action before the hurricane and lack of decisive action after are not blameless.  In addition, the local government allowed building in flood prone areas relying on the levies to keep everyone safe - even when studies clearly showed the levies could and probably would not keep New Orleans dry.  They, like the state, actively courted businesses to locate in New Orleans and they were responsible for the building codes or lack thereof.

Can the blame be attributed to Global Warming?  That is hard to do since similar events have happened in the past and will in the future.  Whether Global Warming is a factor or not is really immaterial to the fact that most of New Orleans is below sea level now and definitely subject to flooding.

Could it possibly be developers who built in flood prone areas with disregard to the possibilities of something like this?  Given that a large portion of New Orleans is below sea level it certainly was a definite possibility that flooding could and probably would occur; therefore, the developers are not blameless.

Could it be the local population who wanted more businesses and people because it would benefit them personally with jobs and a larger tax base; therefore, they elected and kept officials who "represented" their positions?

I believe that for too long greed has been the underlying motive that set the area up for this.  Development was not only allowed, but encouraged, all the while realizing that New Orleans was below sea level and that floods were a very real possibility.

It is definitely past time for us to realize that some areas are just not in our best interest to "develop" or maintain.  How long must the common man bear the brunt of developers who build, take their money and leave the results to the rest of us?  It is time for us to stop it now or pay the price in the future.

Look anywhere you want in the USA today.  Cities have spilled out into the surrounding area making huge sprawling cities on land that would have been better used for farming or other uses.  Greed and reaching for the almighty dollar are undeniable aspects that have allowed this. 

We must face some pretty hard facts today:

-Our inner cities are dying, even the cities that are built in reasonably safe areas. 

-There are almost insurmountable transportation problems caused by urban sprawl. 

-Land that should be used only for agriculture is being developed with the loss of it in future food production. 

-The costs for maintaining the sprawling infrastructure is astronomical.

We must have elected officials that look out for our long term good.  After all, isn’t that one of the primary roles of a strong central government?  Laws must be passed and enforced that recognize that all development is not good.  If development is done without regard to the environment where the development is planned then it must be stopped.  Rebuilding in areas that are flood prone (for instance) is foolish and should be stopped.  Bite the bullet now or pay the price later.

The English word tomato comes from the Spanish tomati.  The tomato is a member of the nightshade family and was thought to be poisonous (the leaves are!).

Is the tomato a fruit or a vegetable?  At one point it was considered a fruit to avoid taxation, but in the late 1800s the Supreme Court ruled it was a vegetable and could be taxed accordingly.

The U.S. passed the 1883 Tariff Act that required a 10% tax on imported vegetables.  This law was challenged on the grounds that the tomato was in fact a fruit, not a vegetable.

In Nix vs Hedden, 149 U.S. 304, Justice Gray wrote, "Botanically speaking, tomatoes are fruits of a vine, just as cucumbers, squash, beans, and peas.  But in common language "¦.. all these vegetables, which are grown in kitchen gardens, and which, whether eaten cooked or raw are, like potatoes, carrots, parsnips, turnips, beets, cauliflower, cabbage, celery and lettuce, usually served at dinner in, with or after soup, fish or meats which constitute the principal part of the repast, and not, like fruit generally, as dessert."

The tomato has a colorful history in that it originated in the Americas, traveled to Europe and then returned to the Americas to produce the tomato we have today.  Lycopersicon Esculentum has become a staple in many cultures.

Today eight species of the tomatoes are still found in Peru which leads to what a Russian scientist, Vavilov; felt that to find the center of a crop species you must locate area where it has its greatest diversity.

The range of wild tomato relatives goes from the tip of Chili to Ecuador and inland almost 200 miles.  The fruits of the wild tomato species are small.  They do not tolerate frost. All members of the tomato family are hermaphroditic, while the cultivated tomato is self fertile and in-compatible with other members of this genus.

The tomato was called "xitomatl" by the Aztecs, while Central America tribes called it "Tomati". 

Ancient Peruvian cultures fail to mention anything like a tomato as being an important part of their diet.  The Aztec culture mentions dishes made of peppers, salt, and tomatoes.

The cerasiforme variety continues to grow wild in Central America producing small, cherry size fruit on a vine.

Matthiolus wrote in 1544 describing tomatoes or "pomidoro (golden apple)" and they were eaten with oil, salt and pepper.  This is supporting evidence that the first European tomatoes were of a yellow variety.

The early Spanish name for the tomato was pome dei Moro (Moors Apple).

The French called it the pomme damour (Love Apple).

Carl Linnaeus in Germany came up with a name of Lycopersicon Esculentum which literally means, "edible wolf peach".

The English noted the tomato as early as 1596 as the Love Apple that was eaten abroad and described them as rank and stinking.

A cookbook published in Naples mentions tomatoes in 1692.

Several cookbooks in the early 1800s in America included recipes that included tomatoes.  Tomatoes were sold in Bostons Quincy Market in 1835.  Four varieties of tomatoes were listed in Thomas Bridgemans catalogue in 1847 (cherry, pear, large yellow and large squash).

It is clear that the tomato was firmly planted in western culture by the late 1800s.

Heirloom varieties come in varying shapes, sizes and colors.  Some are green, some have green stripes, some are rainbow colored, some are shaped like peppers, some are almost black, some are darkish purple, some are cherry size and some weigh over two pounds.

The balance between a good tasting fruit with a tough fruit tolerant to shipping is much sought after.  Ripe tomatoes are soft and bruise easily, beginning to decline in quality in a few days.  The chemical ethylene causes the tomatoes to ripen and is produced by the tomato as the seeds develop near completion.  Normally, growers pick tomatoes just as the shoulders of the fruit lose their dark green color allowing the tomatoes to be shipped while resisting bruising or rotting.  Usually the tomatoes are red when they reach their destination or can be induced to ripen with the application of an ethylene spray.  The taste suffers because of this practice.

In the early 1990s, a bio-engineered tomato called "˜Flavr Savr" was introduced.  This was a huge blunder, as the public was not in favor of bioengineered products and has since been removed from the market.

The purported benefit of lycopene (responsible for the deep red color) has been touted as an anti-oxidant, a molecule that wipes out free radicals that cause cancer in humans.  Tomatoes are a great source of lycopene and many studies have confirmed that people who consume tomato products seem to have a reduction in the risk of cancer.

Tomatoes are cholesterol free.  Studies indicate that eating cooked tomatoes reduces the likelihood of cholesterol related heart problems and some cancers.  Cooking tomatoes releases the lycopene from the skin of the tomato.

Tomatoes are ranked 16^th among all fruits and vegetables as a source of vitamin A and 13^th in vitamin C.  They also contain significant amounts of lycopene, beta-carotene, thiamine, sodium, riboflavin, potassium, phosphorus, iron, magnesium, and niacin. 

Clearly the tomato is the single most important fruit or vegetable in the western diet in terms of a source of vitamins and minerals. 

Not bad for a product that was thought to be hazardous to ones health by many until the late 1800s.