> The problem still remains, someone (briteeyes) will still have to check
the
> "spam" and manually pass on the emails erroneously tagged as spam back to
> coder-com@. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems that at least 75% of spam is of
> the repeating kind, the same scams that circulate in waves like the
The problem still remains, someone (briteeyes) will still have to check the
"spam" and manually pass on the emails erroneously tagged as spam back to
coder-com@. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems that at least 75% of spam is of
the repeating kind, the same scams that circulate in waves like the Afri
Am I the only one who finds it ironic that I'm getting more email about
how to stop spam to this list than actual spam? What we have in place
does a pretty decent job, and we all know how to do end user filtering
if we so desire, so lets just leave it at that. We are doing more work
and spending mo
Spamassassin has been installed on the Undernet mailing list server. Many
spam messages should be discarded without even making it to the lists now.
Everything else now has the header:
X-Spam-Flag:
Which is set to "Yes" or "No" depending on whether Spamassassin thinks it
is spam. You can use th
,
- Alocin
> -Message d'origine-
> De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de Stacy Brown Thellend
> Envoye : 17 fevrier, 2003 16:05
> A : s gibinski
> Cc : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Objet : Re: [Coder-Com] Spam
>
>
> I don't think thi
> Would it be possible to have the person making the submission self-approve
> the posting to the list (rather than the moderator)?
This is an intriguing idea, but there are 2 problems with it that I can
see:
1) Making majordumbo support this would probably be non-trivial.
2) Spammers would even
> Last time this came up i suggested DNS based black lists and it was shot
> down, so i'm suggesting it again. My ISP mail box is protected by just MAPS
> RBL and it is very effectively.
The blacklists are politically motivated in far too many cases.
Moreover, I'm often the unwitting victim of su
how difficult this might be to accomplish or
> reasons that this might not work?
>
> -stephen
>
>
> >From: Thomas Helvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: [Coder-Com] Spam
> >Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 11:26:03 -0800
> >
> >The spam to post ratio on
d not be used in the
submission, etc.
I am guessing that this type of verification would catch most of the spam?
Anyone have any ideas on how difficult this might be to accomplish or
reasons that this might not work?
-stephen
From: Thomas Helvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Coder-Com
Hello rob.c,
On Monday, February 17, 2003, you wrote...
> Last time this came up i suggested DNS based black lists and it was
> shot down, so i'm suggesting it again. My ISP mail box is protected
> by just MAPS RBL and it is very effectively.
Or to be even more effective, I had suggested someth
;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: [Coder-Com] Spam
> On Sunday 16 Feb 2003 1:25 am, Stacy Brown Thellend wrote:
>
> > spams do not get through. I think I get something like 8-10 bounced
spams
> > everyday that don't make it to the
On Sunday 16 Feb 2003 1:25 am, Stacy Brown Thellend wrote:
> spams do not get through. I think I get something like 8-10 bounced spams
> everyday that don't make it to the list. Everytime a spam gets through, I
> adjust the filters to make it harder for more to get through.
The ones tha
Richard Smith wrote:
>
> >
> > well a decent e-mail client and a little bit of patience on behalf of the
> > end user, can easily delete,filter spam.
> >
> > i have many filters, annoying as they are to set up, but at least it does
> > it's job 90-95% of the time. (of course spammers are tricky
>
> well a decent e-mail client and a little bit of patience on behalf of the
> end user, can easily delete,filter spam.
>
> i have many filters, annoying as they are to set up, but at least it does
> it's job 90-95% of the time. (of course spammers are tricky and that 5-10%
> always gets through
I agree. Thanks Stacy, you rock! :-)
--Bleep
Steven_N_Nelson wrote:
Sounds like she is doing all that she can do to stop it, I don't think
there's anything further we can do taht wouldn't just put unneccesary load
on her.
nick
ch is life.)
- wensu
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Stacy Brown Thellend
Sent: Sunday, 16 February 2003 12:25 PM
To: Steven_N_Nelson
Cc: Joseph Bongaarts; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Coder-Com] Spam
On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Steven_N_Nelson
Sounds like she is doing all that she can do to stop it, I don't think
there's anything further we can do taht wouldn't just put unneccesary load
on her.
nick
On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Steven_N_Nelson wrote:
> Could this not be solved by having any posts off the list need approavl
> from the moderator before being allowed through, I do understand this is a
> lot of work thrown onto the moderator, but having monitored this list for
> as long as I have, the sp
On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Joseph Bongaarts wrote:
> > The spam to post ratio on this list seems to have gotten a lot worse
> > lately. Perhaps it's time to to consider limiting posters to
> > subscribers. Discussion?
>
> Not really and option since this is the support address for ircu... The
> coders
> The spam to post ratio on this list seems to have gotten a lot worse
> lately. Perhaps it's time to to consider limiting posters to
> subscribers. Discussion?
Not really and option since this is the support address for ircu... The
coders@ list was made for low S/N ratio, though the posting res
The spam to post ratio on this list seems to have gotten a lot worse
lately. Perhaps it's time to to consider limiting posters to
subscribers. Discussion?
Thanks,
--Bleep
21 matches
Mail list logo
