Received: from mail.giftsforyouamazzon.com ([67.229.174.134]:49419) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1cnX1H-0001gb-Ir for lojban@lojban.org; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 13:56:45 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=dkim; d=giftsforyouamazzon.com; h=Date:From:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:List-Unsubscribe:Message-ID; i=amazon_card@giftsforyouamazzon.com; bh=85qesoej/iEy01Bg0V3qDso+e30=; b=TOCG9hExx8cwua5cWC4Wj0kLLyitorQJbFHQr72rWqJ13enJBnMAH73UMfwHIoshywao2ddHmOdJ o1qNR0yLy1pcfSDsDiqEZEjPTpo3EKqsxqCzfab5TabnymLBUPEKsz5BCEtu//cdybzOFXMyFm++ 9eRsXiqGGlmRVsRpMiw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; q=dns; s=dkim; d=giftsforyouamazzon.com; b=IauNb9TAUmLFcrt7GrvjWLQ86cDMB9NlQtGitV88aK1GqvNJjEYkaYXqm4DHAU/ixfOOFAh0pS7h /uyyYWH25Ln18OU8Pp8R8qzlgMfxZvJyTFF7FW3hqUzVQ7qX24wWz7Lw3Zat+d3OUDxxjBU5GKzu +6sOsK7XlerkS8LVXNc=; Received: by mail.giftsforyouamazzon.com id hos3fa0001g2 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:39:49 -0400 (envelope-from ) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:39:49 -0400 From: "Amazon Card" To: Subject: Your Amazon Rewards MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Unsubscribe: Feedback-ID: 201703131641025851 Message-ID: <0.0.0.15.1D29C39F5DB921A.54CE56@mail.giftsforyouamazzon.com> X-Spam-Score: 4.9 (++++) X-Spam_score: 4.9 X-Spam_score_int: 49 X-Spam_bar: ++++ X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: lojban, Our Big Thanks For your using Amazon.com. Your recent order at Amazon.com entitles you to a new members gift of $200 that that will be added to your Account on March, 13th 2017 Promotional details: [...] Content analysis details: (4.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: amazongifts.com] 2.5 URIBL_DBL_SPAM Contains a spam URL listed in the DBL blocklist [URIs: giftsforyouamazzon.com] 3.3 RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus SBL-CSS [67.229.174.134 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] -0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 RBL: Average reputation (+2) [67.229.174.134 listed in wl.mailspike.net] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -3.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST BODY: HTML font color similar or identical to background 0.7 MIME_HTML_ONLY BODY: Message only has text/html MIME parts -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars 1.9 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level above 50% [cf: 100] 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% [cf: 100] 0.9 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.0 T_REMOTE_IMAGE Message contains an external image =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 = =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20

lojban, Our Big Thanks For your using Amazon.com. 3D"LOGO =20

Your recent order at Amazon.com entitles you to a new membe= rs gift of $200 that that will be added to your Account on March, 13th 2017=

=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
Promotional details:
=20

More information on this GIFT can be found Here.

http://re= deem.amazongifts.com/. Offer is limited to one gift per account.

If you already activated your gift, please disregard this message

=20

Please redeem your gift by Thursday March 23t= h, 2017.

Thanks again for choosing at Amazon.com. =

Amazon.com
Eart= h's Biggest Selection

=20
=20
=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20

 

=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
Stop updates or writ= e to
PO Box 4668 #85919 New York, NY 10163-4668

To End any e-mails from us Immediately = [unsub_link_word_lite] or If you Feel More Comfortable, you can Always Send a Letter to: 4515 Massey Rd Macon GA 31206-4141

=20
=20

=20

=20

=20

=20

=20

=20

=20

=20

=20

=20

=20

=20

=20

=20

=20

Amazon isnt done res= ponding to the New York Times scathing article on what its like to work at = the ecommerce giant Following the report in August that painted Amazon (amz= n 022%) as an unforgiving competitive employer with downright mean manageme= nt tactics Amazon executives have scrambled to refute those accusations In = a memo to staff CEO Jeff Bezos said that he didnt recognize the workplace d= escribed in the Times article and that any callous management practices lik= e those cited in the piece should be reported to Amazons human resources de= partment Prior to Bezoss response Nick Ciubotariu Amazons head of infrastru= cture development defended his company on LinkedIn arguing that singling ou= t several outliers to vilify an entire company does not represent truth in = journalism The latest rebuke comes two months after the story was published= and it aims at poking holes in the credibility of former Amazon employees = who delivered some of the storys most sensational anecdotes In a Medium pos= t Jay Carney senior vice president of global corporate affairs at Amazon wh= os also served as White House Press Secretary and a reporter for Time magaz= ine (a publication of Time Inc which is also the parent company of Fortune)= took direct aim at former Amazon employee Bo Olson who provided one of the= articles harshest zingers Nearly every person I worked with I saw cry at t= heir desk Carney wrote that Times reporters Jodi Kantor and David Streitfel= d didnt seek out? and therefore didnt publish? key details about Olsons bri= ef tenure at Amazon which Carney said ended after an investigation revealed= he had attempted to defraud vendors and conceal it by falsifying business = records When confronted with the evidence he admitted it and resigned immed= iately Olson did not immediately return Fortunes request for comment but in= his own Medium post responding to Carney Times executive editor Dean Baque= t said that Olson told the paper he disputes Amazons account of his departu= re; that Olson was never confronted with allegations of personally fraudule= nt conduct or falsifying records nor did he admit to that Carney took simil= ar jabs at other sources and anecdotes in the article and said that the Tim= es reporters had failed to fulfill their duty to provide readers with full = context Journalism 101 instructs that facts should be checked and sources s= hould be vetted When there are two sides of a story a reader deserves to kn= ow them both In his Medium response to Carney Baquet called Kantors and Str= eitfelds story an accurate portrait of Amazons work environment that was ba= sed on interviews with more than a hundred current and former Amazon employ= ees While Carneys post provides additional information about some of the Ti= mes sources Baquet said what Carney revealed did not contradict what the fo= rmer employees said in our story Instead Baquet wrote Carney mostly asserte= d that there were no records of what the workers were describing Of course = plenty of conversations and interactions occur in workplaces that are not d= ocumented in personnel files Three days after the articles publication in A= ugust the New York Times own public editor delivered somewhat negative feed= back on the article saying it was driven less by irrefutable proof than by = generalization and anecdote For such a damning result presented with so muc= h drama that doesnt seem like quite enough The public editors article does = note that Baquet disagreed with that assessment

=20 3D""/