On 04:19 19/12/03, Keith Moore said:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
It just strikes me as highly unlikely that a WG would ever change course
because of what would look like random comments from outsiders -- it's
not consistent with the dynamics of a WG, or with human nature.
and that just might b
It just strikes me as highly unlikely that a WG would ever change
course
because of what would look like random comments from outsiders -- it's
not consistent with the dynamics of a WG, or with human nature.
and that just might be one of our biggest problems, in a nutshell.
But often the failure to accept clues from
"outsiders" causes working groups to do harm
I don't believe this is true, for any normal definition of "often".
"Occasionally" might be believable.
if I look at why working groups do harm, the failure to accept clues
from outsiders does seem to crop up
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 03:39:58PM -0500, Keith Moore wrote:
> The problem with this analysis is that it assigns greater value to
> contributions from subscribers than to contributions from
> non-subscribers. But often the failure to accept clues from
> "outsiders" causes working groups to do h
The problem with this analysis is that it assigns greater value to
contributions from subscribers than to contributions from
non-subscribers. But often the failure to accept clues from
"outsiders" causes working groups to do harm - and filtering messages
in the #2 category increases this tende
> From: John Stracke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >I work on an approach to block spam with a database of hash (md5) string of
> >spam email:
> ...
> It's been done, and the spammers have already evolved to get around it:
> they randomize the messages so that the hashes don't match.
Unless you are mea
escom wrote:
I work on an approach to block spam with a database of hash (md5) string of
spam email:
1) Reporting a "verified" spam to the database server on the web
2) the mail client check incoming mail, generate a hash string send to and
verify the presence on the server, is yes block email.
3)
> From: "escom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I work on an approach to block spam with a database of hash (md5) string of
> spam email:
> 1) Reporting a "verified" spam to the database server on the web
> 2) the mail client check incoming mail, generate a hash string send to and
> verify the presence on t
On 18 Dec 2003, at 13:10, escom wrote:
I work on an approach to block spam with a database of hash (md5)
string of
spam email:
1) Reporting a "verified" spam to the database server on the web
2) the mail client check incoming mail, generate a hash string send to
and
verify the presence on the se
I work on an approach to block spam with a database of hash (md5) string of
spam email:
1) Reporting a "verified" spam to the database server on the web
2) the mail client check incoming mail, generate a hash string send to and
verify the presence on the server, is yes block email.
3) download a ho
10 matches
Mail list logo
