Hello Steve.
--On 18 May 2005 22:21 +0100 you wrote about Re[2]: Proposal for spam
filters:
I use Spamcop and can only whitelist senders not receivers and the
sender is yourself not the bat.
In that case may I suggest http://www.firetrust.com/
--
Tony.
M.
pgpyNHfY2S1CE.pgp
Description
Hello Alexander.
--On 18 May 2005 23:30 +0200 you wrote about Re: Proposal for spam filters:
Well, the Sender of the list messages, according to the headers I'm
seeing, is Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED], while the From
field has the address of the message author.
Exactly what I said, add [EMAIL
Hello Steve.
--On 18 May 2005 22:21 +0100 you wrote about Re[2]: Proposal for spam
filters:
I use Spamcop and can only whitelist senders not receivers and the
sender is yourself not the bat.
I just visited the Spamcop web site, I clicked the Download Trial link
and it took me
Hello Tony,
-- just now (on 05/19/2005 at 09:32) you noticed:
In that case may I suggest http://www.firetrust.com/
BAD Sig!
-- just now (on 05/19/2005 at 10:17) you wrote:
Exactly what I said, add [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the white list if that's
the sender.
BAD Sig!
-- just now (on
I just visited the Spamcop web site, I clicked the Download Trial link
and it took me to the Mailwasher Pro download page.
It is Spamcop.net not spamcop.com - big difference.
--
Best wishes,
Steve Lee
http://jumbocruiser.com
Tel +44 7768 211612
Tony Boom:
http://www.firetrust.com/
I see that...
...MailWasher is still suggesting that you should bounce back unwanted
email to the spammer so it looks as if your email address is not valid.
That feature is a big problem, and I can't believe it is still in there!
--
St
Steve Lee:
It is Spamcop.net not spamcop.com - big difference.
Yes - spamcop.com is is someone trying to trade on SpamCop.Net's
trademark and reputation. spamcop.com's marketing tactics are down-
right un-sporting. Gotta ask yourself what FirstTrust's deal is in
this...
--
St
Dear Steve,
@19-May-2005, 11:27 Steve Lee [SL] in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Tony:
I just visited the Spamcop web site, I clicked the Download Trial link
and it took me to the Mailwasher Pro download page.
SL It is Spamcop.net not spamcop.com - big difference.
I think you'll find that
@19-May-2005, 11:49 Marck D Pearlstone [MP] in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Steve:
MP @19-May-2005, 11:27 Steve Lee [SL] in
MP mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Tony:
I just visited the Spamcop web site, I clicked the Download Trial link
and it took me to the Mailwasher Pro download page.
SL It
Hello Steve.
--On 19 May 2005 11:27 +0100 you wrote about Re[4]: Proposal for spam
filters:
It is Spamcop.net not spamcop.com - big difference.
No difference at all! Quoting direct from spamcop.net:
SpamCop is the premier service for reporting spam.
You still didn't say what software you
Hello St.
--On 19 May 2005 12:26 +0200 you wrote about Re: Proposal for spam filters:
That feature is a big problem, and I can't believe it is still in there!
It's a feature I never use. You don't need Mailwasher to bounce mail
though, The Bat is more than capable of doing that on it's own
Hello Marck.
--On 19 May 2005 11:49 +0100 you wrote about Re: Proposal for spam filters:
Spamcop do filter spam for you, but only if you use a spamcop.net
email address, which you are not doing, so it's not that.
I quite like the idea of that for 16 quid a year, what do you think?
--
Tony
Hello Marck.
--On 19 May 2005 11:57 +0100 you wrote about Re: Proposal for spam filters:
No Marck - it was Tony's mistake.
Yes, sorry my mistake.
But I can't find where they define their whitelisting stuff.
How odd, you gave the impression you used it all the time for allowing
certain
I think you'll find that was Tony's typo. His description is of
spamcop.net.
Not if Mailwasher is involved it wasn't.
Spamcop (as in spamcop.net) has no association with Mailwasher whatsoever that
I am aware
of.
Spamcop do filter spam for you, but only if you use a spamcop.net
email
How odd, you gave the impression you used it all the time for allowing
certain addresses through that were wrongly classified as spam? Isn't that
why you wanted a [TAG] in the subject line, to make it easier for you to
enter those addresses into your spamcop whitelist?
No Tony that was me
I quite like the idea of that for 16 quid a year, what do you think?
I have used them commercially for a few years and find it is a great
system. You have a certain level of tweaking to adjust the
balance between false reporting and getting too many spams. Until I
joined this group (and it
You still didn't say what software you use for initially trapping spam? I
can't find Spamcop software anywhere. Could you please tell me where to
download it from?
Spamcop.net is a service not software
Spamcop.com sell Mailwasher software
--
Best wishes,
Steve Lee
http://jumbocruiser.com
Dear Tony,
@19-May-2005, 12:41 Tony Boom [TB] in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
TB How odd, you gave the impression you used it all the time for allowing
TB certain addresses through that were wrongly classified as spam? Isn't that
TB why you wanted a [TAG] in the subject line, to make it easier
Hello Marck.
--On 19 May 2005 13:02 +0100 you wrote about Re: Proposal for spam filters:
pssst - wrong person! I was replying to myself, correcting my faulty
research. It is Steve Lee who uses the Spamcop mail filtering, not me!
So ... sorry ... your mistake it remains ;-)
Oooops, sorry
Hello Steve.
--On 19 May 2005 13:04 +0100 you wrote about Re[2]: Proposal for spam
filters:
Until I
joined this group (and it will settle down) I had usually 1 or 2 spams
and maybe 1 false report out of 500 genuine spams.
I might give that a go I think.
Am I right in thinking I can use
Am I right in thinking I can use it for an NTL account and then forward all
that to my boomclan account?
Yes that is right. Redirect your NTL stuff to your spamcop.net
account then either use their POP to collect *all* your emails or else
instruct spamcop to forward to your other account.
I
Tony Boom:
[MailWasher's Mail Bouncer] is a feature I never use.
Good!
My point is that the software suggest and promotes a feature that adds
to the spam problem: Say that a spam is misusing your address as Sender.
Would you dislike Mailwasher to accuse you of spamming and thus
St:
In the stricked sense...
Huh...that misspell was loud and embarrasing... :/
--
St
Current version is 3.5 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
On Wed, 18 May 2005 01:25:06 +0200, Steve Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
In order to easily identify emails from this group trapped in our spam
filters can all subject fields please be prefixed with [The Bat!] if
you have control over the emailer software used?
OMG please don't! We can perfectly
Hello Steve,
On Wednesday, May 18, 2005 at 1:25:06 AM Steve [SL] wrote:
SL In order to easily identify emails from this group trapped in our spam
SL filters can all subject fields please be prefixed with [The Bat!] if
SL you have control over the emailer software used?
the idea might sound
Why can't you just sort on list email adresses?!? You can not rely on
each user to insert a tag - it won't work!
I was not asking each user to insert a tag, I was asking the operator
of the mailing list to do it. That is how Yahoo Groups works and it
is very effective.
I use Spamcop for
You should think about your antispam solution if its dependent on a
subject tag to work reliably.
It is not the anti-spam solution that requires the subject tag, it is
to make it easier to manually scan for trapped (false positive)
messages so they can be identified and the sender whitelisted.
the idea might sound simple and great, iow really efficient, BUT: what
prevents spam from being sent with exactly this phrase in the subject?
We use Yahoo Groups for the SWREG mailing list and every email that
Yahoo Groups sends out has [SWREG] inserted at the beginning of every
message
The best way to not falsely identify mails on this list as spam is to
match the Return-Path against received lines, because all this lists
mail have a Return-Path of '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' and are
coming from '62.80.28.8' which identifies itself as
'draenor.its-toasted.org'.
You are assuming
Steve,
On 18-05-2005 01:25, you [SL] wrote in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
SL In order to easily identify emails from this group trapped in our
SL spam filters can all subject fields please be prefixed with [The
SL Bat!] if you have control over the emailer software used?
Please don't. Most people -
Hello Steve.
--On 18 May 2005 10:43 +0100 you wrote about Re[2]: [TBUDL] Proposal for
spam filters:
That is how Yahoo Groups works and it is very effective.
TBOT is a Yahoo group list and I've never seen anything like extra subject
tags in any subject line? Just the standard subject as typed
On Wed, 18 May 2005 11:45:21 +0200, Steve Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You should think about your antispam solution if its dependent on a
subject tag to work reliably.
It is not the anti-spam solution that requires the subject tag, it is
to make it easier to manually scan for trapped (false
Steve Lee:
I use Spamcop for filtering rather than TB or any other local product as
I find Spamcop usually very accurate with very few false positives but I
found 24 trapped messages from this group yesterday where I might expect
to find only 1 or 2 and identifying them so I can whitelist
Hello Steve,
On 18 May 2005, 10:49 you wrote:
The best way to not falsely identify mails on this list as spam is to
match the Return-Path against received lines, because all this lists
mail have a Return-Path of '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' and are
coming from '62.80.28.8' which identifies itself as
Hello Tony,
That is how Yahoo Groups works and it is very effective.
TBOT is a Yahoo group list and I've never seen anything like extra subject
tags in any subject line? Just the standard subject as typed.
It is an optional configuration setting in each group/mailing list.
--
Best
Alexander S. Kunz:
But then again, the antispam solution you're using shouldn't catch on
TBUDlist messages... if it does, it would be interesting to see which
parameter raises the spam probability level of a list message - and
correct that error of the spam filter.
SpamCop allows
TBOT is a Yahoo group list and I've never seen anything like extra subject
tags in any subject line? Just the standard subject as typed.
It is a configurable option, by default it displays.
Ineterestingly enough this very thread has [TBUDL] at the beginning of the
subject field.
--
Best
But then again, the antispam solution you're using shouldn't catch on
TBUDlist messages... if it does, it would be interesting to see which
parameter raises the spam probability level of a list message - and
correct that error of the spam filter.
Spamcop as an option takes information from
Hello Steve.
--On 18 May 2005 13:50 +0100 you wrote about Re[4]: [TBUDL] Proposal for
spam filters:
Ineterestingly enough this very thread has [TBUDL] at the beginning of the
subject field.
Only because some poor gullible soul took you too seriously :)
I used to belong to a list that had
Hello Steve.
--On 18 May 2005 13:53 +0100 you wrote about Re[4]: Proposal for spam
filters:
I get a number from users of this mailing list.
Would it not be better for you to find out why they are being falsely
classified as spam rather than to expect them to do it for you?
Like I said before
Hello Tony,
%SINGLERE in your template will cure that.
Or Account/Properties/Templates/Reply and deselect 'Use reply numbering
in the subject line'.
--
Best regards,
Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain)
Using The Bat! v3.5
Current
Only because some poor gullible soul took you too seriously :)
I have reason to belive I am that gullible person, thank you!
Please notice that the [TBUDL] tag was automagically added to
the subject line by the software I am running here on my PCs. And
when replying to the original
Hi Tony,
On 18/05/2005 11:24 AM +0100, you wrote:
TBOT is a Yahoo group list and I've never seen anything like extra
subject tags in any subject line? Just the standard subject as typed.
It was specifically administered to do that. Subject prefixing isn't an
imposed feature for all Yahoo
Hello St - Musaic.Net everyone else,
on 18-Mai-2005 at 14:11 you (St - Musaic.Net) wrote:
SpamCop allows you to whitelist Senders, not Recipients.
Its a known fact that many inferior spamfilters have problems dealing with
mailing lists, yes.
--
Best regards,
Alexander
Hello Steve Lee everyone else,
on 18-Mai-2005 at 14:53 you (Steve Lee) wrote:
I get a number from users of this mailing list
That may (partly) be because server side spam killers (SA for sure, don't
know about others) still handle the X-Mailer: header entry The Bat!
(version_number) as
Wednesday, May 18, 2005, Steve Lee wrote:
It is not the anti-spam solution that requires the subject tag, it is
to make it easier to manually scan for trapped (false positive)
messages so they can be identified and the sender whitelisted.
I fail to see why this would be a good thing in the TB
Hello Steve,
On Wednesday, May 18, 2005 at 11:49:29 AM Steve [SL] wrote:
The best way to not falsely identify mails on this list as spam is to
match the Return-Path against received lines, because all this lists
mail have a Return-Path of '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' and are
coming from '62.80.28.8'
Like I said before, spam very, very rarely gets to these lists so why not
just add the complete domain @thebat.dutaint.com to your whitelist? T
I use Spamcop and can only whitelist senders not receivers and the
sender is yourself not the bat.
--
Best wishes,
Steve Lee
Hello Steve Lee everyone else,
on 18-Mai-2005 at 23:21 you (Steve Lee) wrote:
I use Spamcop and can only whitelist senders not receivers and the
sender is yourself not the bat.
Well, the Sender of the list messages, according to the headers I'm
seeing, is Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED], while the
Well, the Sender of the list messages, according to the headers I'm
seeing, is Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED], while the From
field has the address of the message author.
In which case my word useage is wrong. I can only whitelist 'from'
addresses I guess.
--
Best wishes,
Steve Lee
Dear Ritlab folks,
In order to easily identify emails from this group trapped in our spam
filters can all subject fields please be prefixed with [The Bat!] if
you have control over the emailer software used?
I would hate to accidentally report genuine emails as spam at Spamcop
for instance.
--
In order to easily identify emails from this group trapped in our spam
filters can all subject fields please be prefixed with [The Bat!] if
you have control over the emailer software used?
Why can't you just sort on list email adresses?!? You can not rely on
each user to insert a tag -
Steve Lee wrote:
SL In order to easily identify emails from this group trapped in our
SL spam filters can all subject fields please be prefixed with [The
SL Bat!] if you have control over the emailer software used?
Please, no. IMO it's a waste of horizontal space. There are plenty
of headers
On Tuesday, May 17, 2005, 19:47:07, St - Musaic.Net wrote:
I just designed a plug-in for my TB featuring a bunch of *very* useful
things (ie. a *terrific* anti-spam system). One feture I eventually
added was one that inserts the correct subject tag for any mailing
list (TBUDL, TBBTEA, etc.).
Hello Roman.
--On 17 May 2005 21:26 -0400 you wrote about Re: [TBUDL] Proposal for spam
filters:
Neat. Can you post it somewhere? With it's source maybe?
Gordon Bennett. Everyone's going to be using it now. Subject lines full of
quirky little anecdotes enclosed in square brackets. I'm
55 matches
Mail list logo
