Posters can choose to anonymize there email address to a temporary craigslist address, who will then relay any messages sent to that address to the poster's actual email address. Replying to a post, email address will be visible to the poster. The same Flagging group of individuals using sending addressing only once also send spam in mass to posters inundating there inbox with what look like blank responses These messages have the potential of having Javascript or embedded objects in there e-mails.57 Craigslist posters have also reported the tracking cookie (Ad.yieldmanager.com) and (207.net)in there browser history.
http://www.craigslist.org/about/anonymize
http://www.craigslist.org/about/help/replying_to_posts
http://www.spywareremove.com/removeAdyieldmanagercom.html
unless you have been there you realy do not know
http://chicago.craigslist.org/wcl/zip/3291189601.html
Don't include html forms in emails. The Yahoo! Mail client warns users that submitting forms in email can be dangerous
Don't include Javascript in emails
Don't include embedded objects in emails (like flash or active-x).
Because you have participated in a previous RFC on a closely related topic, I thought you might be interested in participating in this new RFC regarding Donald Trump.Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:55, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Is not on SaintAviator lets talk 07:56, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Frank Marshall Davis shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
---
You have reverted the same material three times at Frank Marshall Davis within a four-hour period:
A few seconds after the third revert, you blanked the topic in question despite knowing that at least four other editors within the last week have desired to retain it:
On the article's talk page, you levied insults:
Please self-revert your third-revert (and the topic blank) to avoid further escalation. --Froglich (talk) 06:51, 26 October 2016 (UTC)