Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Roger Phillips: > Monday, July 27, 2009, 7:05:25 PM, among other things, you wrote: > > L> Unfortunately, my version of the Sniper (3.2.1.1 free) hangs when I try to > L> access the white list configuration. ... > Did you start with 3.2.1.1 or did you upgrade from an earlier version? I upgraded, but thanx: I finally got to grab the lost dialog using alt+spacebar,move, it was way way out of the screen. So, I'm going to test the white list feature, finally. -- Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at linuxfan.it Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
'Ello Thomas, On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:44:29 +0700 (your time) you said: > Hello <...snip long stuff...> free? Just so there is no unnecessary hostility poking through here, whatever position you are defending I am not on the other side of it threatening it in any way, so you may want to relax on the adversarial stuff. And just in case it needs to be made clear, I am not an advocate of theft, crime, stealing software, or any other such activities. Neither would I suggest that people take want they want when they want it. And I haven't proposed that everything in the world should be free for everyone, although you seem to inferring that I have. For whatever reason you maybe just misunderstanding, or maybe I am. It matters not, because I don't advocate a 'free for all' anything...or slavery :-/ My home PC has a mixture of commercial and freeware and Open Source software on itif it isn't free or within my budget it doesn't get installed. For example, I purchased TB! right back near the 'beginning' and continue to pay for upgrades. I do the same for a number of other pieces of software as well. But if all the other software I currently use was commercial software then I would never be able to afford to use much of anythingand this would severely limit what I use the computer for. I purchased WinRAR when I had DOS and WFWG 3.11 and the licence I purchased way back then has licensed me for all versions since that time. A number of software authors use this model.Rarlab still exists, and release regular updates. And without me paying, paying again, and paying again, and again... Commercial software authors are just like everyone else, vying for a portion of the pie, a slice of the limited and finite resources that people have available to them. They are selling a product and hope to convince people that it is worth paying our for...often over and over again. The simple fact is that only a few will be able to make a decent living from this practice, not the many...and those that believe that they deserve to make a living just because they are creating something are misguided, and haven't worked out that it is other people value their product, not them. If you get that wrong, then you don't get paidand you'll need to look for another way to make money. -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #29051. Who Win Dog Seer? ¶ Auxiliary Information: • The Bat! Pro 4.2.9.1 • Windows XP Pro 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 • Scanned by avast! Plugin 4.8.1335 DB 090727-0 (27.07.2009) Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Luca, Monday, July 27, 2009, 7:05:25 PM, among other things, you wrote: L> Unfortunately, my version of the Sniper (3.2.1.1 free) hangs when I try to L> access the white list configuration. I still run version 3.2.0.6 as I see that a number of its features are now only available in the Pro version of 3.2.1.1. However, I briefly installed 3.2.1.1 to see whether I experienced your problem and I'm sorry to say ( for your sake!)that that the White list opened normally. Did you start with 3.2.1.1 or did you upgrade from an earlier version? -- Best regards, Roger :flag-SouthAfrica: The Bat! v4.2.9.4 POP3with AntiSpamSniper 3.2.0.6, on Windows XP, version 5 1, build 2600 and Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Roger Phillips: > Monday, July 27, 2009, 1:57:44 PM, among other things, you wrote: > > L> I get a large number of false > L> positives, and I can't stop it from putting some particular messages in my > L> junk folder (e.g., the monthly tbul subscription reminder). It simply won't > L> understand. > Have you added TBUDL to the 'White list'? Unfortunately, my version of the Sniper (3.2.1.1 free) hangs when I try to access the white list configuration. It seems like when there's some dialog open, behind other windows or offscreen, that you can't access. I can't even get to it with alt+spacebar, I have to kill TB and restart. -- Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at linuxfan.it Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Simon, On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:40:42 +0100 GMT (27/Jul/09, 15:40 PM +0700 GMT), Simon wrote: S>>> "Let people..." is a curious turn of phrase. Interesting, capitalism S>>> masquerading as an ideology. >> It is the same philosophy with which people say that everything on the >> internet should be free. S> I don't see how that can be the same. Well, we were talking about free downloads, or was I mistaken? >> Heck, they want all software to be free and will not pay any money, for >> example, for an email client. S> I think that is a vast oversimplificationand not just necessarily so! OK, I'll listen. S> A distinction was made very early on between commercial, shareware, S> freeware, donationware, cardware...blah-ware software. This was S> necessary because not every software author sat down at their S> computer to spend inordinate amounts of time tapping away at their S> keyboards simply because they saw the potential financial rewards S> ahead. I agree. In the beginning, many people wrote software for free. Then some of them realised that it is a full-time job they are doing, and they should be rewarded for it. They needed to buy some rice (or bread or potato(e)s or pasta). S> Aside the above, you have everyone from Ahab who is 10, to S> Desidimona who is 80, And Mary, who is 82! S> with access to a computer, and they, and everyone else, want S> various softwares to run on their computers, otherwise computers S> would be useless. Is that so. A computer without Adobe Photoshop is not useless to me. If it is to you, maybe you want to share in the development cost of that software? S> The term 'software' obviously covers a huge spectrum, such as S> Operating Systems, web browsers, email clients, bitmap editors, S> graph paper printers, automation software, media players, PDF S> viewers, privacy software, (continue on ad infinitum) etc. Just S> count the number of programs sitting on your computer and then S> calculate the cost if every single one of those was a piece of S> commercial software, You mean a piece of software into which the developers put their time, knowledge, and energy, and have a family to feed. S> with regular, almost yearly pay-for updates, and you realise just S> how ludicrous this model is. It's a nonsense. You are not serious, are you? It really does sound as if you want the developers to donate their time and knowledge for free to those who have a feeling they want to use that software. Why would you think you have a right to enslave these people to program for free for you? S> "They" don't want all software to be free because "they" are evil, S> "they" haven't just got deep enough pockets to pay for every bit of S> software and every update. If you cannot afford it, you cannot use it. Same goes for expensive food or expensive cars. If you want it but cannot afford it, you have no implicit right to steal it or demand to get it for free. Sorry 'bout that, mate. S> Even within the so-called developed wealthier countries you have S> incredibly unequal distribution of wealth, with most of the wealth S> belonging to the top 7% to 12% of the population. Pareto says 20% of the people own 80% of the wealth. Anyway, there are different percentages around, depends on who you believe. I do agree with the idea of what of you are saying, though. S> A lot of people within these same countries live on or below S> subsistence levels, and then you look across the globe to other S> countries that are even worse off I live in a developing country, I know what you are talking about. S> and you see that the 'you-must-pay-for-everything' model of S> software distrubition is just madness. It does't work, it cannot S> work. It is called the "digital divide". Sadly enough, it exists. However, there are freeware products for everything. Some programmers choose to produce freeware and donate their time, others need to make a living and need that income from shareware. Tell me what it is that doesn't work. Living in a developing country in which the Windows OS costs as much as a monthly salary, the digital divide was certainly more than just mentioned in my MSc in Computing. S> A few hundred pieces of software on one PC is really not an S> uncommon figure for many people, now calculate a total purchase S> price, and they a yearly fee to keep every one up to date. Far too S> many people don't even earn those sort of amounts each month (or S> even much longer) So they cannot afford that software and the next update. S> so my heart does not immediately bleed for software authors who are S> looking to get rich out of volume distribution LOL! There are several software authors reading this list, and I would not think any one of them has gotten rich. S> and then getting angry at the bad people for not wanting to S> playinstead of accepting that the whole model is flawed and S> perhaps the whole idea needs rethinking. The model is fine. The thinking that anybody has a right to
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Roger, Monday, July 27, 2009, 16:55:02, you wrote: >I have never had trouble with ASS throwing out TB messages. Neither have I ;) -- Regards, Chrillemailto:numbe...@thebat.net Using The Bat! 4.2.9.1 AntispamSniper Pro v 3.2.1.1 Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Luca, Monday, July 27, 2009, 1:57:44 PM, among other things, you wrote: L> I get a large number of false L> positives, and I can't stop it from putting some particular messages in my L> junk folder (e.g., the monthly tbul subscription reminder). It simply won't L> understand. Have you added TBUDL to the 'White list'? I have never had trouble with ASS throwing out TB messages. -- Best regards, Roger :flag-SouthAfrica: The Bat! v4.2.9.4 POP3with AntiSpamSniper 3.2.0.6, on Windows XP, version 5 1, build 2600 and Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Robin Anson: > On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 at 15:22:48 +0100, Privateofcourse wrote:> Hello TBUDL, > > I've done a bit of leg work, but it seems to me that the majority of > > so-called 'SPAM blocker/stopper' solutions don't and can't really do > > anything other than allow you to manage SPAM after-the-fact. That is, SPAM > > isn't actually blocked or stopped at all, but is managed after it has been > > received. > > I wouldn't use something that stopped or blocked SPAM for me. I don't trust > anyone else to make the decision about whether something is SPAM because I > have seen a small number, but that is too many, of emails incorrectly > classified as SPAM. I support providers with good RBL filtering, that's the real solution. Content filtering is only useful to gather spam messages into a single folder, once you've downloaded them. I wouldn't use any mailbox with content filtering if it's the provider to manage it. -- Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at linuxfan.it Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Code 2: > > AntispamSniper > Agreed. After about 30,000 e-mail messages including 1,400 spam > messages, my stats are showing 98.97% accuracy and only 0.08% false > positives. I use Antispamsniper, the free version. I guess there is no way to make it work after the normal TB filters, is it? I get a large number of false positives, and I can't stop it from putting some particular messages in my junk folder (e.g., the monthly tbul subscription reminder). It simply won't understand. I'd be satisfied if I could just make my filters work to save my good messages before the sniper shot'em down. -- Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at linuxfan.it Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions [now OT]
'Ello MFPA, On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 02:21:57 +0100 (your time) you said: > The problem is the greedy capitalist [insert desired expletive] who > pays people just enough to stop them from leaving instead of paying the > value of their contribution. I have absolutely no argument there. I completely agree that 'a workman is worthy of his hire', to steal from an old religious book. People are criminally undervalued, vastly overworked, and grossly underpaid, that's how capitalism works. > This leads them to expect others to also work for next to nothing and > feeds into a downward spiral that leads to nobody valuing what anybody > else does. To some extent I would agree, but I don't believe that it inevitably leads to nobody valuing what anybody does, rather it makes those with less money in their pockets fight much harder to get the services and 'things' cheaper, so that they can afford them. It's a con sequence of an uneven distribution of wealth, where the least wealthy have grown in massive disporportion, have less financial power to bargain with so strive to drive down prices so that they are not excluded from partipation. I heard someone say that if there weren't poor people then the world would be a better place. The person saying it was a businessman running a factory with over 300 workers who had just gone on strike because of work conditions and low wage complaints. You're either on one side or the other in this world! -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #36541. I She Row New Dog? ¶ Auxiliary Information: • The Bat! Pro 4.2.9.1 • Windows XP Pro 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 • Scanned by avast! Plugin 4.8.1335 DB 090726-1 (26.07.2009) Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
'Ello Thomas, On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:41:05 +0700 (your time) you said: S>> "Let people..." is a curious turn of phrase. Interesting, capitalism S>> masquerading as an ideology. > It is the same philosophy with which people say that everything on the > internet should be free. I don't see how that can be the same. > Heck, they want all software to be free and will not pay any money, for > example, for an email client. I think that is a vast oversimplificationand not just necessarily so! A distinction was made very early on between commercial, shareware, freeware, donationware, cardware...blah-ware software. This was necessary because not every software author sat down at their computer to spend inordinate amounts of time tapping away at their keyboards simply because they saw the potential financial rewards ahead. Aside the above, you have everyone from Ahab who is 10, to Desidimona who is 80, with access to a computer, and they, and everyone else, want various softwares to run on their computers, otherwise computers would be useless. The term 'software' obviously covers a huge spectrum, such as Operating Systems, web browsers, email clients, bitmap editors, graph paper printers, automation software, media players, PDF viewers, privacy software, (continue on ad infinitum) etc. Just count the number of programs sitting on your computer and then calculate the cost if every single one of those was a piece of commercial software, with regular, almost yearly pay-for updates, and you realise just how ludicrous this model is. It's a nonsense. "They" don't want all software to be free because "they" are evil, "they" haven't just got deep enough pockets to pay for every bit of software and every update. Even within the so-called developed wealthier countries you have incredibly unequal distribution of wealth, with most of the wealth belonging to the top 7% to 12% of the population. A lot of people within these same countries live on or below subsistence levels, and then you look across the globe to other countries that are even worse off and you see that the 'you-must-pay-for-everything' model of software distrubition is just madness. It does't work, it cannot work. A few hundred pieces of software on one PC is really not an uncommon figure for many people, now calculate a total purchase price, and they a yearly fee to keep every one up to date. Far too many people don't even earn those sort of amounts each month (or even much longer) so my heart does not immediately bleed for software authors who are looking to get rich out of volume distribution and then getting angry at the bad people for not wanting to playinstead of accepting that the whole model is flawed and perhaps the whole idea needs rethinking. S>> I'll remember to tell the altruist that gives up their free time and S>> money that they should desist with their beneficent activities because S>> they should be paid for their troubles, because they are the rules, and S>> fairness demands it. > Exactly. You will not believe how many heated arguments we had, I think > the 90s were the time when users just demanded to get all software and > even online time for free. They thought they had a right to be provided > with free services and software. Again, an oversimplifcation. At those times 'Free' didn't actually mean 'free'. 'Free' hasn't meant gratis for a very long time. The tenner-a-month ISPs in the UK back then (the 90's) advertised their services as unlimited free access for only £10 per month :-/ People were jumping onboard because their telecoms companies were exploiting this new source of revenue from Interent access and phone bills had soared out of control. People were finding themselves with bills for hundreds of pounds a month just for connecting to the Internet to collect email and chat. When there is limited access to a money pot (which is all of the time IOW) 'people' will naturally and fairly be looking for cheaper, if not gratis, solutions for most things, and quite rightly. I support them in their efforts 100%. And it is nothing to do with valuing the efforts of others...not in the slightest. Just because you decide to create something doesn't automatically give you the right to have an income gain from it. Blimey, all the great art in the world, and all the musical masterpieces written, would never have been created if that was the way it really worked! -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #21639. I Sow Grew No Edh? ¶ Auxiliary Information: • The Bat! Pro 4.2.9.1 • Windows XP Pro 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 • Scanned by avast! Plugin 4.8.1335 DB 090726-1 (26.07.2009) Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
