David W. Fenton wrote:
On 11 Jan 2005 at 0:15, Owain Sutton wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 10 Jan 2005 at 23:43, Owain Sutton wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
Also, keep in mind that this only happens once with each correspondent -- once you've been whitelisted, it's just like
normal, old-fashioned email correspondence.
You mean, just like if they hadn't bothered to challenge me in the first place?
No, if I didn't challenge you, it would mean you hadn't attempted to email me.
Unless a virus-infected computer (or spammer) was using my address...
In that case, you have ever reason to ignore the challenge.
So I should be happy to receive and ignore a challenge from a spammer, and also be happy to have to respond to a challenge which stops spam....hmmm.....
I do *not* understand the hostility to the system itself -- it looks like your garden-variety Luddite response to me.
I'm not a luddite at all, I don't think....I just don't want to use email in the way that I'd have to drive if there was a guy carrying a red flag in front of me.
If the red flag guy is standing between you and the abyss, wouldn't that be preferable? In terms of email, that's what we're facing: a complete breakdown of the existing system to a state of unusability (when you have to review 200 emails a day classified as spam to make sure none are false positives, you might as well give up, since you'll inevitably make many mistakes, missing at least half the false positives, because there's just no way one can clearly evaluate 200 messages in the spam folder).
The red flag is there to keep us from plunging over that abyss.
You're verging on conspiracy-nut territory here. It simply sounds like your ISP is doing a very bad job at filtering spam.
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
