I've seen spammers do some creative tricks, but a recent one has piqued my curiosity. An ad for "business to business marketing" software, a CD-ROM of domain name owner names and addresses mined from various whois databases, includes a notice at the bottom claiming the message to be "in compliance of the new email bill section 301. Per Section 301, Paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S. 1618, further transmissions to you by the sender of this email will be stopped at no cost to you. This message is not intended for residents in the State of WA, NV, CA & VA..." That's not the part that interests me, though the not-intended-for clause is cute (spam with forged headers is illegal in WA via an unenforcable state law). What's interesting is that below the notice is a block of text. I'm guessing this is either an attempt to get past spam filters, or it's there to show up in search engines in case it is ever quoted on a weblog:

On the other hand, the appearance of parasitic gaps in domains relatively inaccessible to ordinary extraction is not subject to our hedonic Folklife perspective over a given time period. We can see, in retrospect, the product configuration baseline appears to correlate rather closely with a parasitic gap construction. However, relational information is not to be considered in determining improved subcultural compatibility-testing. In the discussion of resumptive pronouns following (81), any exponential Folklife coefficient is rather different from the total configurational rationale. As a result, the earlier discussion of deviance necessitates that coagulative measures be applied to all deeper structuralistic conceptualization. Obviously, the systematic use of complex symbols adds explicit performance contours to a corpus of utterance tokens upon which conformity has been defined by the paired utterance test. However, the characterization of critically co-optive criteria is not quite equivalent to the evolution of specifications over a given time period. As a resultant implication, the fundamental error of regarding functional notions as categorial requires considerable systems analysis and trade-off studies to arrive at the anticipated fourth-generation equipment.

Anyone have a more interesting explanation? (P.S. Yes, qJason, I too have noticed an influx of spam. A major mailing list must have changed hands.)