GOP Congressman Turns Antitrust Hearing Into Personal Tech Support Session (vice.com) 136
An anonymous reader quotes a report from VICE News: We all have trouble with our email sometimes. We don't typically get to harangue the CEO of Google about why, say, Dad's Gmail is acting up, though. You have to be a member of Congress to pull that. Rep. Greg Steube, Republican from Florida, went there during Wednesday's high-profile congressional hearing about tech giants' market dominance and anti-competitive behavior. Handed the chance to throw any question at some of the most powerful people in the world, Steube pressed Google CEO Sundar Pichai to troubleshoot his parents' recent email issues. Specifically, they weren't getting his campaign emails, which Steube seemed to think was because of an anti-conservative bias among Silicon Valley titans. Pichai responded by implying that Steube and his dad don't understand how Gmail tabs work.
"Suddenly, I get elected to Congress, and I'm now up here in Washington, D.C., and my parents, who have a Gmail account, aren't getting my campaign emails," Steube said. "Why is this only happening to Republicans?" Pichai responded by talking about how Gmail automatically sorts emails by their source, breaking out messages from personal contacts into a folder separate from those sent by self-promoting groups like a congressional campaign. "We have a tabbed organization," Pichai said, veering into tech-support mode. "The primary tab has emails from friends and family, and the secondary tab has other notifications, and so on." Steube interrupted to point out that it was his dad who complained that the campaign emails weren't showing up. And that meant Pichai's statement that the Primary tab should feature all emails from family members didn't make any sense to him. "Clearly, that familial thing that you're talking about didn't apply to my emails," Steube said, glossing over the fact that the emails were coming from his campaign, not from his personal account. "Our systems, probably, are not able to understand that it's your father," Pichai deadpanned.
"Suddenly, I get elected to Congress, and I'm now up here in Washington, D.C., and my parents, who have a Gmail account, aren't getting my campaign emails," Steube said. "Why is this only happening to Republicans?" Pichai responded by talking about how Gmail automatically sorts emails by their source, breaking out messages from personal contacts into a folder separate from those sent by self-promoting groups like a congressional campaign. "We have a tabbed organization," Pichai said, veering into tech-support mode. "The primary tab has emails from friends and family, and the secondary tab has other notifications, and so on." Steube interrupted to point out that it was his dad who complained that the campaign emails weren't showing up. And that meant Pichai's statement that the Primary tab should feature all emails from family members didn't make any sense to him. "Clearly, that familial thing that you're talking about didn't apply to my emails," Steube said, glossing over the fact that the emails were coming from his campaign, not from his personal account. "Our systems, probably, are not able to understand that it's your father," Pichai deadpanned.
this is what we get (Score:5, Insightful)
when we elect someone so fucking stupid they can't use gmail
Re:this is what we get (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, I see you've also tried the new Google Photos app...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's his dad. We don't even know if the Congressperson has ever seen gmail. Or maybe they use it but aren't having the problem or they use it a different way. This is third-hand tech support, without the middleman even having screenshots to show.
I would dismiss the entire conversation. Nobody learned anything, because it was a stupid forum in which to ask for someone who wasn't even there, to be helped.
Tech support (Score:2)
I imagine there are thousands of slashdot readers who can relate to being blindsided at some event by someone who finds out you 'know a lot about computers'.
I once worked tech support - a fact that I will never bring up to anyone I have regular social contact with.
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine there are thousands of slashdot readers who can relate to being blindsided at some event by someone who finds out you 'know a lot about computers'.
I challenge you to find someone who hasn't!
It's pretty poor taste to bug someone at a party to get free tech support (or medical consultations, that's another common one). It's about a thousand miles beyond that to do it at a congressional hearing.
I once worked tech support - a fact that I will never bring up to anyone I have regular social contact with
Re: (Score:3)
I still get this from my father at times. He lives over 3 hours away and, while on the phone, I'll get this interaction.
Dad: "When I try to print this document, it's not coming out."
Me: "Dad, I can't debug your printer-computer setup over the phone."
Dad: "What did I send you to college to study computers for?"
(Note: I studied Computer Science and graduated over 20 years ago. He'll still trot out this line from time to time.)
Re: (Score:2)
Dad: "What did I send you to college to study computers for?"
That's their superpower - parental guilt. There is no escape.
Re: (Score:2)
Dad: "What did I send you to college to study computers for?"
So that I could get a job creating new things for people willing to pay for them, rather than doing tech support like all the Phoenix University and DeVry graduates.
Spectrum - take notes (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I keep getting asked by the likes of Andrew Yang via text and email to who I want to be Biden's VP and to donate to things, yesterday I was even asked by moveon.org via a text if I was going to vote for Joe Biden... I didn't sign up for these either.
Do I complain? Nope, I just delete them.
It's as if it's only wrong/bad when one side does it.
Re: (Score:2)
Report them as spam, works better. The fewer political emails get through the better, I don't care what frelling party they're coming from.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I guess cancel culture is one route to go... perhaps I'm a little more tolerant. When I get an email from the democrat Attorney General of the state I live in (someone I never voted for, gave money to, or have been in contact with the office of) about what a great job he says he's doing... I hit delete and move on.
Politicians are going to fundraise, reaching email or sms is just a more modern way of trying to do so and GOTV. It's to be expected, and learned to be put up with.
Re: (Score:2)
Correctly marking unsolicited marketing message as unwanted is not cancel culture. It's a social duty.
People that seek out those messages can continue to do so, their creators can still access and use social media platforms to publicise and promote their cause and rejecting a specific message isn't an attack on the person sending it.
Cancel culture is bad, but so are unsolicited emails and text messages. Fortunately there's no conflict in decrying both.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, spam e-mails have taught us that clicking the "Unsubscribe" link will just confirm to them that there's a live human on the other end and you'll get a ton more e-mails. So instead of risking that by clicking Unsubscribe, many people will just mark it as spam. It removes the list from your inbox while not generating more spam. Would it be preferable to click Unsubscribe? Sure, but not all services resp
Re: (Score:2)
There is a difference though, if the marking applies only to ones own inbox, vs signaling to the email platform (sender or receiver) that people are effectively downvoting their content.
Re: (Score:2)
It involves seeking to use the instrumentalities of the platform to punish voices you happen to find annoying, which are otherwise legitimate.
Yes, it's a form of cancel culture.
Re: (Score:2)
Unsolicited marketing emails are not legitimate.
Re: (Score:2)
Billboards are unsolicited marketing material, they infringe upon ones eyesight when in public.
Mailed credit card offers are unsolicited marketing material, they infringe upon your trash & time as need to dispose of them.
An email from a candidate sending saying "I hear you are on our side, why not put your name on the list of supporters by donating a few dollars" may be unsolicited marketing material as it, however that candidate has every right to try to get your support, within reason.
All are legitima
Re: (Score:2)
that candidate has every right to try to get your support, within reason
Sending me spam is not reasonable.
Re: (Score:2)
You keep unilaterally declaring things, without evidence, explanation or specifics specifics, it might explain why you've an uphill battle.
Re: (Score:2)
What battle? I'm not the one complaining to the CEO of Google that I can't spam people.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect best case they toss the ones that don't give any money and only count the others, but I suspect they don't actually tabulate any of them outside of the $$$ pledged.
I quit being a Republican when George Jr was prez. Up until 2-3 years ago I thought he was the worst president in my lifetime, now he's
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Well he has a goal, how novel (Score:5, Funny)
Patton walks into a new HQ and sees a soldier sleeping on duty, who quickly stands up after being swatted.
"Well, get back down there, son. You're the only son of a bitch in this headquarters who knows what he's trying to do."
Florida Man (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Florida Man is supposed to be either a badass or a total weirdo. This guy is just run-of-the-mill lame. Hopefully they can elect us a new Florida Man.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Florida Man (Score:2)
It does, but a classic Florida man story would involve holding up Congress with a pellet gun, or crossbow.
Re: (Score:2)
It does, but a classic Florida man story would involve holding up Congress with an alligator.
Fixed that for Florida Man.
Re: (Score:2)
Or holding a rubber band shooter, while cooked on meth, THINKING he's holding a crossbow.
Lawyers are the larval form of politicians (Score:2)
So many Congresscritters are drawn from the profession that is least informed about technology. They think it's beneath their dignity, and a task they hand to their executive secretaries and unpaid interns. They come from a world of fax machines chewing on reams of paper. Even doctors are a little more advanced than that.
Re: (Score:2)
And this is the group that believes they can set the budget and priorities for NASA. Is it any wonder that our space program is a shambles.
The biggest issue (Score:5, Insightful)
The biggest issue isn't that he wasted everyone's time or that he is too stupid to understand GMail. THe biggest issue is that despite being too stupid to understand GMail, be had already decided he knew exactly what the problem was. He had already decided it was only happening to republicans and based on this wrong assumption had decided that it was because Google was anti-conservative.He wasn't asking questions, he was making points and his points were wrong.
Re: (Score:1)
Out of curiousity have you spoken with his father and seen his Gmail account?
You're making a lot of assumptions here.
It's also quite important to note that whether he's right or wrong, and whether the way in which he asked the question was appropriate or not, he was accurately representing the views of many American voters.
Isn't that what Congressmen are for?
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have to assume anything. The Congressman was upset that Gmail doesn't realize the family relationship between his political campaign and his father. That lack of understanding is pretty concerning for someone who is making decisions about technology regulation.
Re: (Score:2)
TBH I thought it was that his father didn't undersatand that gmail has tabs (it does?! mine doesn't, my desktop inbox is a big old mess of everything) or that emails are being filtered by some Google algorithm that does, in fact, know that the congressman is his son.
We all know that Google's algorithms know a lot more about you than you think, perhaps the surprise is that they are NOT linking the congressman's campaign emails with his family members!
Re: (Score:2)
I believe that's the explanation the Google CEO gave, but then again he doesn't know the exact details of the situation (other than what the Congressman described) and isn't a front line tech support worker. It could be a tabs issue. It could be that the Congressman's mailing list setup was bad (e.g. sending one e-mail with a bunch of CC's) and Google marked it for suspicious behavior. It could be that the Congressman bought his initial list from a shady vendor which resulted in many people getting his e-ma
Re: (Score:2)
We all know that Google's algorithms know a lot more about you than you think
We all know that Google's algorithms theoretically could know a huge amount about you, if they were able to perfectly reassemble all of the various bits of data about you, with no misattributions or other errors. What they actually know about you can only be guessed at.
Based on the ads I see, what Google mostly knows about me is whatever I just bought and am no longer in the market for.
Re: (Score:3)
It's also quite important to note that whether he's right or wrong, and whether the way in which he asked the question was appropriate or not, he was accurately representing the views of many American voters.
Isn't that what Congressmen are for?
If I call my Congressman and tell him that the faucet in my kitchen is leaking, I hope he wouldn't go into a congressional hearing and harass the CEO of Moen about selling faulty washers to Republicans.
Re: (Score:2)
Quite.
If however he receives dozens or hundreds of letters and emails regarding faulty washers, hears from his colleagues that they're getting comparable feedback and finds out that nobody voting democrat is getting a leak then you may not hope he harasses the CEO of Moen but it would be fair and reasonable for him to ask pointed questions.
Also: Fucking harassment. What the fuck? Oh no, he asked a fucking question, in a forum in which he's one of the questioners. Such harassment. Get a fucking grip.
Re: (Score:2)
He didn't have reports of hundreds of emails and letters. He didn't have stories from his colleagues. None of his colleagues reported having heard from their constituents.
He had precisely one anecdote, from his father, who is probably old enough to be the straight man in any "old people don't understand computers" joke you want to make. And he jumped to a conclusion about what it means and wants the CEO to explain why they're picking on him.
He's a whiny bitch who plays the victim and thinks it makes him lo
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, aren't you the internet tough guy, calling a Congressman 'a whiny bitch'. Why, he must be weeing his knickers right now.
In other news, for many months there's been a strong sentiment amongst Republicans that they're being unfairly censored by Silicon Valley tech companies. Maybe you missed things like https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com] let alone https://www.washingtontimes.co... [washingtontimes.com]
Sure, three senators put together a bill because their dads can't use gmail. Fucking hell you're an ignorant cunt. Reply or don'
If only ... (Score:2)
Quick, someone come up with a catchy name.
Re: (Score:2)
How about 'network neutering'?
Because it's spam. (Score:2)
If it comes from a politician, and isn't a direct response to an email I sent them, then it's spam, full stop. I don't want to hear their lies and political promises they won't keep. And that goes from any politician from any side of the political spectrum. Put your platform on a web site, and when it comes to preparing for election day, I'll do my research, and make my choice appropriately.
Re: (Score:2)
You probably turned it off on day one like any power user who wants control would do.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
They're using pine on an 80x24 terminal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Using pine doesn't make you a Luddite. Don Knuth has a secretary who prints his e-mail and then he replies on paper.
Re:Non answer (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The summary is bogus, he's asking why people, including his own father (and yours truly) observe Google doing political blacklisting. I've seen it in my own gmail box and I know perfectly well how to read the email source. I also have the damned tab nonsense turned off--I never turned the tabbed inbox on to begin with.
It's just a way to give a non-answer for their politically motivated blacklists [amazonaws.com] like the one I just linked for news sites.
Re:Non answer (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
If you don't like it, you can always pay for your own email.
So you admit that it is a fact that Google does maintain politically motivated blacklists.
So we can end the debate over if its true or not, and get on with the debate over what to do about it, yes?
So we will never ever see you bringing back the debate about if its true or not, yes? You will never be that disingenuous again, yes?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> hard right wingers, either.
How do you know he has a boner?
Re: (Score:3)
It's telling of the state of american politics when someone who just so happens to be from the party you don't like automatically becomes a hardliner in your mind without any further evidence.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
When you define half of a country as "hardliners", it says nothing about that half of a country.
But it says a lot about you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have no doubt that you would think that. That was my entire point.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wish you the strength of character sufficient to survive the moment when you do understand it.
Re: Non answer (Score:2)
Hard right wingers? Didnt know you were into guys? But seriously, what is it that you are advertising that would exclude people of any political affiliation? The only politically excluding product I could come up with is a do-it-yourself abortion kit. And Id hope everyone avoided that regardless of affiliation.
Re: (Score:1)
Geez, what a "gotcha"!
Who knew the CEO of Google has an account on Slashdot! you really got him, dude, case closed!
Re:Non answer (Score:5, Funny)
Re: Non answer (Score:2)
Exactly. Or use an email client like Thunderbird so all your Gmail emails show up in a single inbox, like normal. This politician is confusing technology ignorance for "bias", which seems to be a common thing these days.
Re: (Score:2)
you can always pay for your own email
I do. I pay for and run a couple of email servers for various clients. And ensuring delivery to gmail is about 75% of my time spent on it. Google does what it wants, and everybody else has to fall in line because so many people use it, which is not how email is supposed to work. Google does not get to dictate how email works; Google does not get to dictate how HTTP works.
And you can stop with the "it's a free service" nonsense. Google did not build gmail out of the goodness of their corporate heart. They to
Re:Non answer (Score:5, Insightful)
Could be that the congress man is using a single email server and is blasting an unsolicited list of people who bother to click "THIS IS SPAM" button and it increases its weight to throw it away.
Maybe the server does some fucked up stuff in the message meta tag so google discards it.
Mabey the congressman server is banned for doing this every few years. So its more automated than anything.
He has given NO insight on how his mailing list is set up and it also seems he, or his people, have no idea how to properly set up a mailing list to work with Google's anti spam filters. Shoving a bunch of email's in a cc list and blasting it to 5000 people will get your server almost insta blocked on any mail server anti spam filter, regardless of political affiliation.
I mean, he IS from Florida, so he might not know this like his other brothers.
Re:Non answer (Score:5, Informative)
The summary is bogus, but your comment is bogus too. I have no idea what that list is, but it definitely does not have any conservative news sources on it. Conservative news sources are things like: Fox news, The Cato institute, The National Review, WBAL, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Examiner, ... On the list is nonsense names like "gaybuzzer" and sites serving viruses while impersonating conservative news DNS names like "drudge-report.co" (which is not the drudge report) and "independencetribune.com" which is not the Independent Tribune. Readers: don't visit the sites I listed here unless you have confidence in your virus protection! (Strangely it also has "google.com/maps")
Re: (Score:1)
There are some legitimately blocked sites in there as you mention, I won't deny that, but if you want some real news sites, look at torrentfreak or the conservativetreehouse.com both of which carry legit news and original research.
Re:Non answer (Score:5, Informative)
The summary is bogus, he's asking why people, including his own father (and yours truly) observe Google doing political blacklisting.
They (and you) observe Google doing blacklisting, no more and no less than that. They interpret it as being 'political' due to their own context. You'd need to set up a new account, subscribe to every mailing list across the political spectrum, and monitor delivery success rates to prove anything else. Even that wouldn't prove it conclusively because different groups are likely to frame messages in different ways.
They are using mailing lists in a way that's triggering Google's spam filters. They should stop doing that and take some personal responsibility.
Re: (Score:2)
That headline is bogus (Score:1, Insightful)
So, he's asking why his dad isn't getting the emails and the answer is that he must not understand tabs? That's one hell of a spin to put on the questioning, given that the response assumes they're too stupid to find the email and not that Google is "losing" them. I can attest from first hand experience that Google has some bogus filtering that looks political.
Also, as Google should know, some of us have that tab nonsense turned off because we set up filters for all of our regular email years ago. In par
Re:That headline is bogus (Score:4, Insightful)
If there's actually a bug or some blacklisting going on here, this needs to be investigated with proper evidence collection.
Re:That headline is bogus (Score:4, Interesting)
Except that it's not actually blacklisting, the main tab is for family-and-friends email, secondary tabs are for not-family-and-friends email. It's working exactly as intended. Google doesn't know that the bot set up by the person working for the person working for the person who's his son to spam his inbox with political crap should be treated as if it's email coming from his son.
More to the point, if Google did dig through his personal affairs to the point where it could figure all that out he'd instead be screaming about Google being Big Brother.
Re: (Score:1)
As mentioned, plenty of us *don't use the damned tabs* and assuming it's just on another tab is just a way of deflecting blame.
They've already been caught with blacklists [amazonaws.com] for news and I've personally seen some absolutely ridiculous spamboxing of email in my own account, so I'm not inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt here.
Re: (Score:3)
They've already been caught with blacklists [amazonaws.com] for news
This is not a blacklist but a random list of (mostly, but not exclusively typesquatting) Urls. What makes you think that this is an url blacklist used by any company?
Re: (Score:1)
The fact that a Google insider leaked it and how badly those sites are deprioritized in search. I mean, I sort of see why they wouldn't want Torrentfreak coming up, but that's a legit news site reporting on piracy-related news, not a pirate site in and of itself. Pretty sure there have been quite a few Slashdot stories linking there, as well.
Many of the real sites start around where they list "sites with high user block rate."
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that a Google insider leaked it
That is still a claim and not a fact.
What we have as "fact" is that someone uploaded a list of domains to a public Amazon AWS server.
This is even less fact than turning an aerial picture of a truck into the fact that Iraq produces WMD.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a 4 year old unrelated news article about a product that has been axed like 2 years ago.
And no, I'm not going to hunt myself for evidence of your claim.
Google Tech Support (Score:2)
In fairness... it's really not easy to get a hold of Google tech support.
Re: That headline is bogus (Score:2)
Thereâ(TM)s more than just source to consider. You also need the right DNS records for the sending mail server (matching your âoefromâ domain), the right headers, and a âoecleanâ IP address for your sending server that isnâ(TM)t dynamic and hasnâ(TM)t been on any blacklists. Then you also need unsubscribe mechanisms, valid destination domains for any links (which better have valid SSL certain and not have hosted malware in the past)
And to top it all off, you better have no
Re: (Score:1)
This is fair, but much spammier things get through than that and there's no obvious problem with the email server in terms of DKIM or what have you.
Also, besides the fact that Google has already been caught with a blacklist [amazonaws.com] for news, I've heard many reports on how buying google apps for your domain makes these errors magically go away with no changes being made. Now, I haven't seen that one personally because I haven't signed up for that service, but I've heard it from enough techies with no reason to lie
Re: (Score:2)
Also, besides the fact that Google has already been caught with a blacklist [amazonaws.com] for news,
That's like the third time you're maiking that claim without linking to any news source carrying that story.
Re: (Score:1)
It came from a google insider who leaked it. This might or might not surprise you, but most of them didn't cover the competition getting blacklisted for some odd reason.
Quite a few of the sites on it discussed it, though.
That said, I wouldn't call all of them "news" sites. That's kind of an insult to compare a site with great research and primary sources like theconservativetreehouse.com to "news" sites that offer random anonymous rumors that they wanted to hear.
Re: That headline is bogus (Score:4, Interesting)
In other words, there is no one who confirmed the source.
I'm not sure if I saw ANY actual newssite. But what's wrong with having a blacklist of scam- and phising sites using the old typesquatting tricks?
I may be wrong with any of them, but there are three things that make me question the story about "Google blacklisting republican newssites"
Besides the lack of a reliable source,
1. most of the entries were legitimate blocking targets and NOT actual newssites
2. Google goes great lengths to avoid manually compiled lists and tries to tackle much smaller problems
3. refers to a header file? Based on the legends about their hiring process, the use java instead of C
As I said, not enough to actually disproof anything, but not enough to convince be to believe an unnamed, unchecked source in an anonymous forum.
Re: (Score:1)
refers to a header file? Based on the legends about their hiring process, the use java instead of C
Some companies optimise for low-latency by writing core components in C, I'd expect anyone with Google-levels of traffic to have done the same.
I suppose one way it might be possible to prove it would be to search for news reports on this "Google Now" (whatever it is, I don't use many Google services these days) and see how often the "blacklisted" sites appear. Of course, you'd search for news reports matching the headlines as these sites have put them.
Some I find notable:
Re: (Score:3)
So, he's asking why his dad isn't getting the emails and the answer is that he must not understand tabs?
Close. From TFS, he asked why his parents "weren't getting his campaign emails, ..." and
Pichai responded by talking about how Gmail automatically sorts emails by their source, breaking out messages from personal contacts into a folder separate from those sent by self-promoting groups like a congressional campaign.
Seems to me that the Congressman's parents need either (a) add the campaign's address to their contacts or (b) check the other inbox folders/tabs.
Re: (Score:2)
I use email clients like Thunderbird to access my gmail account. Doing it on Firefox/Chromium is worthless: they have their tabs as well as other fancy 'organization' that makes searching for my stuff a bitch. In the past, I could just go to the folder where I had saved things, and search for something. Now I'm expected to search for things in the mailbox just like I search for things on the internet?
I migrated from Yahoo after their second breach, and once something happens in Google to trigger me to
Re: (Score:1)
The Congressmen apparently thinks Google should know that the campaign email are coming from the campaign of a family member. Exactly HOW Gmail is meant to know that is left as an exercise for the reader.
Re:Dems too (Score:5, Informative)
Democrats would have done the same, no need to make this partisan.
Democrats also had lots of chances to ask questions and yet didn't go down this path. Now that I think about it, I never hear anyone say "Well, Republicans do it." Which doesn't mean that it doesn't happen; if people do make that statement it's so rare that I can't recall the conditions under which it happens. But I can't go a day, without reading comment sections on the internet where Republican faults are pointed out without someone saying "Democrats do it too" or "Both sides are just as bad" without any evidence, examples or anecdotes to back up that position. It's like you think that if a Republican has done it surely a Democrat has too, which may not be true. Or if Republicans are doing it often surely Democrats are doing it the same order of magnitude.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, he is a Florida representative. I doubt any kind of parity of mind can equal that of even his own party.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Except that there are a lot of explanations that don't involve Google misconduct. It could be a tabs issue, like the Google CEO said. It could be that the Congressman's mailing list setup was bad (e.g. sending one e-mail with a bunch of CC's) and Google marked it for suspicious behavior. It could be that the Congressman bought his initial list from a shady vendor which resulted in many people getting his e-mails that didn't want them and marking them as spam. There's a lot of possibilities that don't involv
Re: (Score:2)
It is an example of Vice's clear, unrepentant, partisan bias.