Received: from nobody by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1cC9ry-0004DZ-5j for lojban-newreal@lojban.org; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 10:44:38 -0800 Received: from [185.150.189.232] (port=57884 helo=themostbeutygft.com) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1cC9rt-0004Cn-Av for lojban@lojban.org; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 10:44:37 -0800 Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 12:05:48 -0700 To: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <22427725374277253n11167454nlojban@lojban.orgi_68> Subject: Sears Christmas-$50-eRewrds-for you: Enjoy Cert #4277253 Mime-Version: 1 From: SearsPoints Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii X-Spam-Score: 4.6 (++++) X-Spam_score: 4.6 X-Spam_score_int: 46 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: Nice work Cyber-Week Continues Grab your-Sears-$50 card [...] Content analysis details: (4.6 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.7 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist [URIs: themostbeutygft.com] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.7 MIME_HTML_ONLY BODY: Message only has text/html MIME parts 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.9 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% [cf: 100] 1.9 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level above 50% [cf: 100] 0.8 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS Nice work

Cyber-Week Continues

Grab your-Sears-$50 card

Jump start your Christmas-shopping

Get your card #4277253 by completing a short-questionairre. You can use these-rewards all of December for whatever you need.

So many great items are here you wont even know what to get-first.

Your SearsReward: 11167454 >

-

-

-






--Hooks Nieland. 1110 Hayes Ave Norfolk Ne 68701-4905
We thank you for being apart of our updates but if you wish to no longer be apart then tell us now and you will not hear more


--PO Box 971, Reno, NV 89504
Kindly request these to no longer be sent when you let us know your preference


-- Hello Games said that, as each user???s experience would be very different, it would be difficult to recreate the exact scenes from the ad. However, they believed it was fairly straightforward to locate content of the type shown in the ad and to demonstrate that such content was commonly experienced by all users who played NMS for an average period of time.

They stated that all material features from the ad that had been challenged by complainants appeared in the NMS universe in abundance. While each player experienced different parts of the NMS universe, there was a low probability that anyone playing the game as intended would fail to encounter all these features in some form within an average play-through.

Taking into account the above points, we considered that the overall impression of the ad was consistent with gameplay and the footage provided, both in terms of that captured by Hello Games and by third parties, and that it did not exaggerate the expected player experience of the game. We therefore concluded that the ad did not breach the Code.

The ASA agreed, saying: "The summary description of the game made clear that it was procedurally generated, that the game universe was essentially infinite, and that the core premise was exploration. As such, we considered consumers would understand the images and videos to be representative of the type of content they would encounter during gameplay, but would not generally expect to see those specific creatures, landscapes, battles, and structures." It also ruled that the developers hadn't misled customers over graphics: "We understood the graphical output of the game would be affected by the specifications of each player???s computer, and considered that consumers would generally be aware of this limitation." It concluded: