Path: utzoo!telecom-request Date: 2 May 91 00:12:28 GMT From: Arup Mukherjee Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Prodigy or Fraudigy ??? Reply-To: Arup Mukherjee Message-ID: Organization: University of Pennsylvania Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 324, Message 3 of 10 Lines: 22 In article overlf!emanuele@kb2ear. ampr.org (Mark A. Emanuele) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 311, Message 1 of 4 > doubt upon that. The E-mail controversy started because people were > finding mail they sent with comments about Prodigy or the E-mail, > especially negative ones, didn't ever arrive. Now Prodigy is saying > they don't actually read the mail, they just have the computer scan it > for key terms, and delete those messages because they are responsible > for what happens on Prodigy. They said WHAT? Did Prodigy "officially" admit this somewhere? I had a feeling that this might be happening, but I thought I was just getting paranoid! I remember that on one of the Prodigy boards someone posted a message saying that they had written to the FCC about the matter, and received a reply to the effect that Prodigy would be violating FCC rules if it were restricting private mail betweem two adults. Prodigy responded that they only did such things to bulletins, and private e-mail was never interefered with. Does anyone know of an admission to the contrary?