I don't want to hijack this, erm, thread, but I get loads of spam (my mail goes through a hosting provider, I (post-)filter locally) and a significant part of it is loaded with technical terms, even FreeBSD specific. I suppose it's meant to confuse filters. Do other folks get this too?
Dan On Friday 24 August 2007 01:00:20 Paul Schmehl wrote: > --On Thursday, August 23, 2007 22:37:53 +0100 dgmm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > >> Basically, what you (and others as well) are suggesting is that the list > >> maintainers do double the work so that you don't have to bother with > >> spam filtering. > > > > How does this equate to double the work for the list maintainers? I've > > never operated a mailing list so I don't understand what work is > > involved in operating one or how that workload might be increased if > > some people post with one name while having the automated system mail > > out to a different, subscribed address > > Most modern mailing list software tests addresses periodically, > automatically to make sure they are accepting mail. Some have suggested > "solving" the spam problem by using throwaway addresses to send email to > the list **even if the address doesn't work**. Now the maintainers have to > maintain a separate list of exemptions and configure separate options so > that those throwaway addresses aren't dropped from the list automatically > after the requisite number of bounces. And endure the endless bounce > notifications from hundreds of thoughtless people. > > >> Seems rather self-centered to me. > > > > In what way? > > You have a problem. You want someone else to help you solve it by creating > more work for them so that you'll have less work to do. > > >> This is the internet. Spam is endemic. > > > > So rather than look for multiple methods to reduce the amount of incoming > > to *my* address I should just accept it all and filter it locally? > > Absolutely. It isn't the responsibility of the rest of the world to solve > your problem. > > > That seems rather irresponsible to me, ANy method which can help stop it > > source appeaers on the face of it to be a better solution. > > Of course it does, because it requires no work on your part. It's always > "better" if you can get someone else to expend energy on your behalf while > you sit back and reap the benefits. That's why unthinking people love > socialism. > > >> Short of encasing your computer in > >> concrete, there's no way to avoid getting spam **even if you never post > >> to a mailing list**. Either learn to deal with it or stop subscribing > >> to lists. > > > > I'm sure that attitude will appear welcoming to new users. > > Gee, I'm sorry I hurt someone's feelings by suggesting they take > responsibility for their own problems. Let me get down on my knees and beg > forgiveness. > > I subscribe to more than 50 lists. You have no idea what a pleasure it is > to read, over and over again, about other people's problems with spam. > It's useless chatter that solves nothing and makes the list less valuable. > (And yes, you do enough of it, and I'll /dev/null your address and never > hear from you again.) If people took a few minutes to figure out how to > rid themselves of the spam, they'd accomplish more than all the endless > discussions about how to solve an unsolveable problem. _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"