One of the pics I noted was “not racy” in my previous post is, in fact, racy. I failed to note the see-through nature of the doodad the girl was wearing in my “glance and toss” yesterday afternoon, and only discovered my error after cries (some via email) for pics caused me to wade through my garbage*.

(*you all suck)

Honestly, I’m more worried about various powders that might be in any thin envelopes from poor foreign countries with horribly-written addresses, than I am about evaluating any potential softcore pics contained within. (I don’t honestly believe there will be any powder… but, then again, I don’t honestly expect to get these letters, either.)

I regret the error; please return your minds to the gutter.

…

If you really want (…), here’s a poorly-sanitized pic for you to gawk at. (It’s amazing what a three-second Photoshop smear job can do for an originally NSFW picture.) I think the pic on the right is supposed to feature some sort of “come hither” look, but it doesn’t really do anything for me. The gal in general really isn’t my type (despite how amorphously-defined “my type” is).

Scammers are going to have to work harder than this if they want my money! This is the 21st century; I expect—nay, demand—that my spam be custom-tailored for my preferences in females! (Beyond that, I hold snail mail spam to a higher standard than email spam. They’ve gone for the extra effort to get their spam physically in front of me—they might as well make it worthwhile.)