Re: BTS spam( Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!)
In Wed, 27 Dec 2000 00:19:19 +0100 Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] cum veritate scripsit : I've seen one in lyx-cjk bugs. It's cosmetically annoying. I really would love to remove it but there would be quite a lot of trouble (and fear that legitimate info could be lost). Tell me the bug number and I'll clean it out. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=62770repeatmerged=yes so it's 62770. regards, junichi -- University: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Netfort: [EMAIL PROTECTED] dancer, a.k.a. Junichi Uekawa http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer Dept. of Knowledge Engineering and Computer Science, Doshisha University. ... Long Live Free Software, LIBERTAS OMNI VINCIT.
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Wirzenius) wrote on 24.12.00 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Robert van der Meulen [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ignoring spam has made the internet the spam-ridden place it is right now. Spam hasn't been ignored for the past six years, thank you very much. It thrives regardless of the large efforts to kill it, because a) it is cheap and b) there are enough people who react to the ads by buying. Note that point a) means that enough people tends to be about one... There's another wrinkle here that often gets overlooked. Most spam does not even *need* to work for spam as such surviving, as long as people keep buying spamware. Selling spamware is one of the really successful spam variants. Those guys don't care if the people they sell spamware to are successful with their spams. Did you ever wonder (assuming you even noticed) why so much spam gets sent to completely invalid addresss (for example, to message ids)? Because spamware sellers don't care if the finely targetted addresses they sell actually work (let alone are targetted in any way). MfG Kai
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 12:05:00PM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote: Did you ever wonder (assuming you even noticed) why so much spam gets sent to completely invalid addresss (for example, to message ids)? Because spamware sellers don't care if the finely targetted addresses they sell actually work (let alone are targetted in any way). On related note, it's fun to watch all the spams sent to oldclosedbug@bugs.debian.org or even oldclosedbug[EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses. OTOH it's not fun to discover that someone spammed existingbug[EMAIL PROTECTED] (those escape me since I'm not watching the appropriate mailing list). For the record, right now I'm the primary reason why the spam in the BTS `magically' disappears, once it's reported to [EMAIL PROTECTED] :) -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
BTS spam( Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!)
In Tue, 26 Dec 2000 16:06:08 +0100 Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] cum veritate scripsit : On related note, it's fun to watch all the spams sent to oldclosedbug@bugs.debian.org or even oldclosedbug[EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses. OTOH it's not fun to discover that someone spammed existingbug[EMAIL PROTECTED] (those escape me since I'm not watching the appropriate mailing list). For the record, right now I'm the primary reason why the spam in the BTS `magically' disappears, once it's reported to [EMAIL PROTECTED] :) I've seen one in lyx-cjk bugs. It's cosmetically annoying. I really would love to remove it but there would be quite a lot of trouble (and fear that legitimate info could be lost). regards, junichi -- University: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Netfort: [EMAIL PROTECTED] dancer, a.k.a. Junichi Uekawa http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer Dept. of Knowledge Engineering and Computer Science, Doshisha University. ... Long Live Free Software, LIBERTAS OMNI VINCIT.
BTS spam( Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!)
In Tue, 26 Dec 2000 16:06:08 +0100 Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] cum veritate scripsit : On related note, it's fun to watch all the spams sent to oldclosedbug@bugs.debian.org or even oldclosedbug[EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses. OTOH it's not fun to discover that someone spammed existingbug[EMAIL PROTECTED] (those escape me since I'm not watching the appropriate mailing list). For the record, right now I'm the primary reason why the spam in the BTS `magically' disappears, once it's reported to [EMAIL PROTECTED] :) I've seen one in lyx-cjk bugs. It's cosmetically annoying. I really would love to remove it but there would be quite a lot of trouble (and fear that legitimate info could be lost). regards, junichi -- University: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Netfort: [EMAIL PROTECTED] dancer, a.k.a. Junichi Uekawa http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer Dept. of Knowledge Engineering and Computer Science, Doshisha University. ... Long Live Free Software, LIBERTAS OMNI VINCIT.
Re: BTS spam( Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!)
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 03:30:47AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: For the record, right now I'm the primary reason why the spam in the BTS `magically' disappears, once it's reported to [EMAIL PROTECTED] :) I've seen one in lyx-cjk bugs. It's cosmetically annoying. I really would love to remove it but there would be quite a lot of trouble (and fear that legitimate info could be lost). Tell me the bug number and I'll clean it out. -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
Quoting John Galt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): You going to send them the bill then? At the bottom off the mailinglist subscription page: snip I think that you have some volunteers to send dunning notices within this thread (myself included). If you already are, could you post a summary of your actions and results on a periodic basis to somewhere that we can refer the close the list thread starters to? Count me in. See also the post in a thread later on in debian-devel. Greets, Robert -- | [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Cistron Internet Services - www.cistron.nl| | php3/c/perl/html/c++/sed/awk/linux/sql/cgi/security | | My statements are mine, and not necessarily cistron's. | Sodomy is a pain in the ass.
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Ben Collins wrote: On Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 01:06:53AM +0100, Robert van der Meulen wrote: Quoting Bas Zoetekouw ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Now you can boost the reliability of ordinary Windows 3.x, 95 and 98 to nearly the level of Windows NT or 2000, Microsoft's professional and industrial version of Windows. Hmm, the debian lists get quite a lot of spam lately. Is there anything that can be done about this? Close debian-devel for posting by non-subscribers, ask for volunteers who would like to 'moderate' debian-devel, and have them look at the rejected messages and accept them if on-topic. Every mailing list i know has these functions, I was also wondering why we weren't using such a system ;) Every mailing list software might have these functions, but none of the open project mailing lists that I know of do this. linux-kernel, gcc, glibc, openldap. There's a very good reason for this. Not the least of which is the effort in keeping it up. Secondly, not all developers use the same email accounts. I, for example, have three email accounts from which I post to Debian-devel. A possible solution would be to have two types of subscribers to each list, let's call them moderators and dontwantspams. Moderators get every message to the list instantly. Dontwantspams get messages instantly that fall in any of these categories: a) come from subscribed e-mail addresses, b) come from e-mail addresses that have posted successfully at least twice before, c) contain any one of Debian or potato/woody/whatever in the message body. Dontwantspams do get all other messages as well, but with a few hour's delay -- except if they are canceled by one of the moderators. If moderators reply instead of cancel, dontwantspams will receive both messages at once. Moderators can also cancel messages if they're already sent to dontwantspams, which will mean that subsequent messages from the same address won't match category b). Okay, this would probably require major modifications in the mailing list software, but I guess this is one of the very few moderation methods that might actually work (and be manageable) without hindering discussion in a big way. Regards (and merry Christmas), Anne Bezemer
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
Daniel Stone wrote: On Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 01:06:53AM +0100, Robert van der Meulen wrote: Quoting Bas Zoetekouw ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Now you can boost the reliability of ordinary Windows 3.x, 95 and 98 to nearly the level of Windows NT or 2000, Microsoft's professional and industrial version of Windows. Hmm, the debian lists get quite a lot of spam lately. Is there anything that can be done about this? Close debian-devel for posting by non-subscribers, ask for volunteers who would like to 'moderate' debian-devel, and have them look at the rejected messages and accept them if on-topic. Every mailing list i know has these functions, I was also wondering why we weren't using such a system ;) Every mailing list software might have these functions, but none of the open project mailing lists that I know of do this. linux-kernel, gcc, glibc, openldap. There's a very good reason for this. Not the least of which is the effort in keeping it up. Secondly, not all developers use the same email accounts. I, for example, have three email accounts from which I post to Debian-devel. Solution: Pick one you like, stick to it, even if it means having forwarders, having to SSH in, faking senders, whatever. anot her solution is the one I've seen svlug.org using: you can subscribe without email being sent to you (they use mailman, IIRC). So you can subscribe all your addresses and sent email to list from all of them but receive email from list only in one account. erik
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
On Sat, Dec 23, 2000 at 01:39:45AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: On Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 12:43:03AM +0100, Bas Zoetekouw wrote: Hmm, the debian lists get quite a lot of spam lately. Is there anything that can be done about this? Pardon my French, but this is a fucking stupid idea. Did you ever stop to think that there are only a tiny handful of mailers that even think about supporting this? And in a half-decent way? If this is implemented in -devel, or any Debian lists, it will be one of the, if not the, most stupid decisions made. A possability might be to have a signature key. This is not significantly different than the extra header idea but it would allow *any* MUA to work with it. Could be something like a GPG fingerprint or whatever. Just a thought. -- Frisco Rose By any other name, I would smell the same E.O.U. Stud. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Physics Mathematics Computer Science INTACT Director
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
from the secret journal of esoR ocsirF ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): A possability might be to have a signature key. This is not significantly different than the extra header idea but it would allow *any* MUA to work with it. Could be something like a GPG fingerprint or whatever. Just a thought. first thoughtungh. overhead./ -- Jacob Kuntz underworld.net/~jake [EMAIL PROTECTED] Strategery -- George W. Bush Lockbox -- Al Gore
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
from the secret journal of Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Solution: just deal with the few spam we get so as not to hinder real discussions. Ben amen. OK, if you can do that, I'm absolutely thrilled to do it, PLEASE make debian-devel spam-free. But the problem is that you CAN'T. Because there's too much of it. What are we going to do, kill everything with more than 2 exclamation marks? Come on, don't tell me you're _that_ naive.
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
Daniel Stone wrote: from the secret journal of Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Solution: just deal with the few spam we get so as not to hinder real discussions. Ben amen. OK, if you can do that, I'm absolutely thrilled to do it, PLEASE make debian-devel spam-free. But the problem is that you CAN'T. Because there's too much of it. What are we going to do, kill everything with more than 2 exclamation marks? Come on, don't tell me you're _that_ naive. He said deal with it and ignore it, not anything from your quote suggests that he said something about stopping it.
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
On Sat, Dec 23, 2000 at 12:00:26PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: from the secret journal of Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Solution: just deal with the few spam we get so as not to hinder real discussions. Ben amen. OK, if you can do that, I'm absolutely thrilled to do it, PLEASE make debian-devel spam-free. But the problem is that you CAN'T. Because there's too much of it. What are we going to do, kill everything with more than 2 exclamation marks? Come on, don't tell me you're _that_ naive. By deal with it I mean, get over it. It's only a few spam, you can hit the delete key as easily as anything else. BTW, I'm on a 28.8, and I get over 1000 emails a day from all the lists I am sub'd to. So I do see a lot of spam, even beyond Debian's lists. If I can ignore it, so can everyone else, IMNHO. Ben -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
Quoting Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): BTW, I'm on a 28.8, and I get over 1000 emails a day from all the lists I am sub'd to. So I do see a lot of spam, even beyond Debian's lists. If I can ignore it, so can everyone else, IMNHO. Ignoring spam has made the internet the spam-ridden place it is right now. As long as people do not do anything about it, spam will be as commonplace and as 'ignorable' as spam by snailmail. I do not like that, and lots of people don't. Apart from the annoyances, spammers almost regularly clobber up mailservers, network links, and are being _very_ intrusive. Spam is not an ignorable problem, and every spam-account i can manage to get killed, will get killed. If your opinion is that we shouldn't actively try to bring down the spam to a minimum, and just delete it - that's your opinion, but definately not mine, and not a lot of others' too ;) Greets, Robert -- | [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Cistron Internet Services - www.cistron.nl| | php3/c/perl/html/c++/sed/awk/linux/sql/cgi/security | | My statements are mine, and not necessarily cistron's. | If you want divine justice, die. -- Nick Seldon
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
On Sat, Dec 23, 2000 at 02:21:46AM +0100, Robert van der Meulen wrote: Quoting Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): BTW, I'm on a 28.8, and I get over 1000 emails a day from all the lists I am sub'd to. So I do see a lot of spam, even beyond Debian's lists. If I can ignore it, so can everyone else, IMNHO. Ignoring spam has made the internet the spam-ridden place it is right now. As long as people do not do anything about it, spam will be as commonplace and as 'ignorable' as spam by snailmail. I do not like that, and lots of people don't. Apart from the annoyances, spammers almost regularly clobber up mailservers, network links, and are being _very_ intrusive. Spam is not an ignorable problem, and every spam-account i can manage to get killed, will get killed. If your opinion is that we shouldn't actively try to bring down the spam to a minimum, and just delete it - that's your opinion, but definately not mine, and not a lot of others' too ;) My opinion is that trying to block spam is a losing battle. Trying to attack it at it's roots by closing open relays, filing suit on people breaking the law, etc..is the right thing. It's like arresting drug users, as opposed to arresting the drug smugglers. You should kill the root, not the offspring. Ben -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
You going to send them the bill then? At the bottom off the mailinglist subscription page: http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/subscribe is the mailinglist policy. Basically, the policy says either pay us $1,000 up front or $1,999 after. Martin (Joey, whatever you prefer...), Remco, Alexander, Anand (the listed mailing lists administration members): I think that you have some volunteers to send dunning notices within this thread (myself included). If you already are, could you post a summary of your actions and results on a periodic basis to somewhere that we can refer the close the list thread starters to? On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Robert van der Meulen wrote: Quoting Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): BTW, I'm on a 28.8, and I get over 1000 emails a day from all the lists I am sub'd to. So I do see a lot of spam, even beyond Debian's lists. If I can ignore it, so can everyone else, IMNHO. Ignoring spam has made the internet the spam-ridden place it is right now. As long as people do not do anything about it, spam will be as commonplace and as 'ignorable' as spam by snailmail. I do not like that, and lots of people don't. Apart from the annoyances, spammers almost regularly clobber up mailservers, network links, and are being _very_ intrusive. Spam is not an ignorable problem, and every spam-account i can manage to get killed, will get killed. If your opinion is that we shouldn't actively try to bring down the spam to a minimum, and just delete it - that's your opinion, but definately not mine, and not a lot of others' too ;) Greets, Robert -- Pardon me, but you have obviously mistaken me for someone who gives a damn. email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
I was kind of feeling sorry about including you as a CC in the last post--partial oversight, partial personal policy (I never quite know how to deal with tertiary CCs: I generally detest people who adulterate a message they're replying to, but I also think that responsibility for replies stops about third-hand). This eases my conscience somewhat: Sending bills and dunning letters IAW a pre-existing policy sounds like it fits your kill the root, not the offspring ethos... So are you a part of the problem in this case or willing to be part of the solution? On Fri, 22 Dec 2000, Ben Collins wrote: On Sat, Dec 23, 2000 at 02:21:46AM +0100, Robert van der Meulen wrote: Quoting Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): BTW, I'm on a 28.8, and I get over 1000 emails a day from all the lists I am sub'd to. So I do see a lot of spam, even beyond Debian's lists. If I can ignore it, so can everyone else, IMNHO. Ignoring spam has made the internet the spam-ridden place it is right now. As long as people do not do anything about it, spam will be as commonplace and as 'ignorable' as spam by snailmail. I do not like that, and lots of people don't. Apart from the annoyances, spammers almost regularly clobber up mailservers, network links, and are being _very_ intrusive. Spam is not an ignorable problem, and every spam-account i can manage to get killed, will get killed. If your opinion is that we shouldn't actively try to bring down the spam to a minimum, and just delete it - that's your opinion, but definately not mine, and not a lot of others' too ;) My opinion is that trying to block spam is a losing battle. Trying to attack it at it's roots by closing open relays, filing suit on people breaking the law, etc..is the right thing. It's like arresting drug users, as opposed to arresting the drug smugglers. You should kill the root, not the offspring. Ben -- Pardon me, but you have obviously mistaken me for someone who gives a damn. email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Boost Windows Reliability!!!!!
On Sat, Dec 23, 2000 at 02:21:46AM +0100, Robert van der Meulen wrote: Quoting Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): BTW, I'm on a 28.8, and I get over 1000 emails a day from all the lists I am sub'd to. So I do see a lot of spam, even beyond Debian's lists. If I can ignore it, so can everyone else, IMNHO. I can ignore it, too. It was my fault for misreading; I stand corrected. Ignoring spam has made the internet the spam-ridden place it is right now. As long as people do not do anything about it, spam will be as commonplace and as 'ignorable' as spam by snailmail. I do not like that, and lots of people don't. Apart from the annoyances, spammers almost regularly clobber up mailservers, network links, and are being _very_ intrusive. Spam is not an ignorable problem, and every spam-account i can manage to get killed, will get killed. If your opinion is that we shouldn't actively try to bring down the spam to a minimum, and just delete it - that's your opinion, but definately not mine, and not a lot of others' too ;) My opinion is that trying to block spam is a losing battle. Trying to attack it at it's roots by closing open relays, filing suit on people breaking the law, etc..is the right thing. It's like arresting drug users, as opposed to arresting the drug smugglers. You should kill the root, not the offspring. Which isn't to say you leave the offspring alone. You slay them, too. You have to do both - not just one or the other. EOT for me.
