From owner-freebsd-chat  Wed Jul 30 22:35:29 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-chat>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA04983
          for chat-outgoing; Wed, 30 Jul 1997 22:35:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from iccu6.ipswich.gil.com.au (iccu6.ipswich.gil.com.au [203.1.75.10])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA04975
          for <freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 30 Jul 1997 22:35:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cs14p14.ipswich.gil.com.au (cs14p14.ipswich.gil.com.au [203.1.73.28]) by iccu6.ipswich.gil.com.au with SMTP id PAA20553
  (8.6.12/IDA-1.6 for <freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG>); Thu, 31 Jul 1997 15:33:18 +1000
Message-ID: <199707310533.PAA20553@iccu6.ipswich.gil.com.au>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <peters@mail.gil.com.au>
From: "Peter Stubbs" <peters@gil.com.au>
To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 15:35:16 +10
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: HOTMAIL.COM, JUNO.COM, etc....
Priority: normal
In-reply-to: <199707300015.UAA04770@pandora.hh.kew.com>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.54)
Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On 29 Jul 97, Drew Derbyshire wrote:

> Most of the SPAM I've seen recently has been from either large
> sites (usally forged) or totally bogus names -- Earthlink, CIS, AOL,
> ATT, and Hotmail seem popular for return addresses this month.

I don't understand what a spammer has to gain from sending out mail 
without a valid return address. Isn't the return mail that gives them 
the business? What am I missing here?

BTW: I had some spam on a recent hunting trip. It's disgusting! I 
burped up little spams for hours. ;}

Cheers,
Peter