Overnight I received this email:
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 14:35:01 -0800
Message-Id: [200712152235.lBFMZ1tV020872@crawler002.qts.spock.com]
From: Spock Team [donotreply@spock.com]
To: [me]
Subject: Stephen has requested your trust on Spock
Hi James C. McPherson,
Stephen has added you as a trusted contact on Spock.com. By accepting
trust, you will be able to search each others' network, share contact
information, and get news.
Get started here: [url]
-
Unsubscribe: http://www.spock.com/do/public/request_unsubscribe
I've got a few questions here. Firstly - why Stephen? I know perhaps 6 or 7. Secondly, wtf is spock.com? Thirdly, why is it that if I go to www.spock.com, I get see this image?

I know nothing about this so-called "trusted" social networking site, and I'm most definitely *NOT* going to sign up for something where the top level website is so opaque that you can't even find out what they are.
If you work for spock.com, or you're the Stephen who added me as a trusted contact, I'd appreciate you leaving a comment on this entry to help me figure out whether you're a bunch of spamming 419ers, or real people who have something real to offer.
Technorati tags: topic:{Technorati}[social networking], topic:{Technorati}[trust], topic:{Technorati}[spock.com]
Update, 21:30 I got a comment from
Stevel 'fessing up to triggering the email, and another comment from Jay @ spock.com reassuring me that they don't send un-authorised emails. So having a reply-to address of
donotreply@spock.com is fine, in his book.
Which is great, fine and dandy, except that I still cannot actually find out wtf spock.com actually is or does. Or who runs it. Or what its goals are. Or why I should provide yet another social or professional networking site with my personal details.
If you want my trust, you need to show me who you are and what you do, and you need to be transparent about it. No info, no joinee.
Oh, and Stevel? Are you sure your Nigerian Uncle only has USD15,000,000? Wasn't he the poor one in the family? :-P
Posted by jmcp
@ 02:29 PM
[
Comments [2]
]