Hello, Goodbye
Hello List, Two of my recent threads were declared Dead Horses for cause. In at least one of them, I displayed some impatience, which is my achilles heel in the Autumn of my years. Although I had unsubscribed this list and had my photo removed from the gallery, I feel I owe both Marck and Allie, this public statement. Do not reply if for my sake: I won't see it and am un-subscribing straightaway after posting this. First: Marck, Allie, and other maintainers/moderators of this list do so out of a dedication none of us could afford to purchase--if it was for sale, which it is not. Second, I think the success of TB! is very much enhanced by their collective knowledge and presence. Third, unlike them, I am just a visiting goon and am not obliged to dilute my messages with tact although civility is paramount. The essential message of my earlier (now dead) threads was this: External spam-filtering software of *all* kinds, mere offers a challenge to the designers of lucrative spam programs to thwart it--and I am confident they will, given very little time. There is only one way to stop Spam and that is to essentially make your e-mail address an unlisted address. You can do that painfully effectively with TB!, which I love dearly. I tried in my earlier messages to describe the process I use (admittedly controversial and a bitter pill for some). My process is absolutely deadly accurate. Believe it. Your unlisted telephone number is vulnerable to random computer-dialing. You know that. You know when you pick-it up and there's silence, that a computer has dialed it, and a person will soon come on the phone to sell you something (having caught a fish). You also know (here in the States, at least), you can pay US$7/mo or some such to have those calls arrested via triggering a special ring sequence. This is an outrage. My method unlists your e-mail, period and forever. TB! will allow you to decide how to handle mail from unknown addresses. Using TB!'s wonderfully adept Perl filtering routines, you can even decide whether you even want to see those messages during a break-in period. I offended some in my replies to earlier posts here. For that, I sincerely apologize. I have a wish-list for TB! and high atop it is the ability to save my filters for transport to other accounts. If it exists, I have yet to discover it. So long, list. I'm too old to arm-wrestle or play King-of-the-mountain. Furthermore, I think this rampant positioning within forums, both here and elsewhere, is uncalled-for. If anyone here thinks I am guilty of that, I apologize. We should each be able to express our opinions without being personally insulted or slapped around by those with opposing views Learn TB! Promote TB! Support TB! I have used many others but TB! was my final -mail client purchase. One more thing. It is said that the hyphen (-) is something added when two-words are newly married. I think it's time to remove the hyphen from the word e-mail, to become email, with the uppercase E only if it begins a sentence. So long, folks. May your emailbox be spam-free, and may you join with those who think the 10x bloat of HTML mail is an un-educated and un-caring waste of infrastructure resources. It is also the guise of most Spam. ;-) I remind you not to reply for my eyes--I have un-subscribed this list. -- Warm regards, Mike Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: A Useful spam filter
MA Unfortunately, it is my sad yet considered opinion the choice to do MA your own filtering is evaporating. My friend told me boastfully about MA how his Iowa (USA) ISP was Filtering his mail with a bayesian MA filter. I pointed him to a free bayesian filter he could operate MA locally, knowing exactly what was getting bounced. I politely beg to disagree. And I not only respect your right to do that, I yield to your well-earned position of respect within this forum. I think simple self filtering of spam is easy for most people. More than 95% of all my wanted email is both addressed to me and comes from someone with whom I have previously corresponded in my address book (2000 names), Agreed. Mail from prior correspondents is a cakewalk. A respectably large address book. or comes from a dozen or so servers (eg. my University). Agreed. Filtering by server to allow makes wonderful sense. Filtering by server to disallow, in terms of unwanted commercial mail would be a full-time job for me. Of the remaining 5% of wanted mail, it is difficult to imagine anything that would fail to mention my name (Dear Mark, Hi Mark, Mark, Hello Mark) or a few dozen keywords that any novel new person approaching me would have to mention to be of any interest whatsoever. Although an estimated 30% of my unwanted commercial mail does, in fact, mention my name, your suggestion to use phrases common to personal greetings and new-person approaches is valued. There are creative ways to do that as the wheat separates from the chaff. Clearly this doesn't apply to everyone who uses email, but I would guess it applies to 95% of us out there who use our email addresses with a modicum of discretion. Your comment a modicum of discretion can be taken in this context of this public personal reply to be addressed to me and I appreciate this opportunity to comment. I personally exercise more than a modicum of discretion in my dealings with e-mail, and yet as a resident of the US deal with between 30 and 50 bits of unsolicited e-mail each day. I am an active member of the Flight Simulation and Train simulation communities. I purchase frequently on-line. I am a registered user of a dozen or more privately run on-line forums for exchange of information, simulation 3rd-party software support, and to share what I've learned. I do not use IRC, I never post to Usenet although I am capable of doing so without my e-mail address or identity visible or optainable except through the service providers I use. I never press unsubscribe and until very recently did not bother to try to bounce mail. As I wrote in a separate post, most spam replies themselves bounce, however that could easily be a contrivance to separate the live fish from the possibly dead or dying ones. I respectfully remind you that any e-mail which does not bounce will reveal to the sender a fish has been caught. You and I are powerless to change that and I would be very surprised to discover that fact yet to be exploited. While visiting the respectable German website representing FSNavigator, a brilliant program designed to augment the navigational aids within Microsoft Flight Simulator, I replied to a message posted in the site's Newsgroup never for a moment even *dreaming* the message would be copied and posted to Usenet with my full registered address fully visible and ripe for harvest. I communicated my displeasure straightaway to the company but the damage had been done and my Spam skyrocketed--just as anyone's would if some unhappy chap with an axe to grind were to add a personal address to a Usenet post in that most lucrative and rich e-mail mining district. I do not dash about the Web willy-nilly, and if using Google, I will switch to a very crippled and script-disabled Opera-3, whose abilities are wonderfully limited as to what it will and/or will not reveal. Does this profile and these comments fit one who uses poor discretion in how e-mail is used? No, it does not. And yet, the spam flows. For the record, I very much enjoy my on-line pursuits, to include the challenge of creative eradication of unwanted commercial mail from my personal mailbox. I am here to learn. I am here to share. I am here to exchange ideas. I am not an e-mail simpleton and am long in the computer tooth with what I feel are things to contribute. A few simple filters help to ice the cake (not addressed to me, multiple similar addressees, a few nasty keywords, foreign characters in subject, and routings through a few countries through which legitimate mail to me would never be sent). Not addressed to me does not work for me although it will return to my Alternatives arsenal at the first stop. Foreign characters in the subject does not work for me, because many I correspond with are overseas in both directions. There are brilliant bits of software coming from non-english speaking countries, and many of us correspond through Altavista's Babelfish. Routings through a few
Re: A Useful spam filter
snip ##Go Mike!!## ;-). Thank you Marck--not to be confused with the Mark to which I replied somewhat pointedly yet politely earlier this morning. I wish no-one harm and value my opportunities to express opinions as fodder for balanced assessment in the virtual assembly of public comment venues both here and elsewhere. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: A Useful spam filter
huge snip *IMPORTANT* E-MAIL* let's see. Is that an oxymoron? Yes, it most certainly is in my household and after more than a decade of promoting it, encouraging people to use it, and trying to take it seriously, I have finally decided to step back and look at what it is, what isn't, what it has become, and the monster it is becoming. Make that after more than two decades . . . My, how time flies. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automated response(?)
Your message was automatically moved for review without being read because HTML formatting was detected as: %OATTACHMENTS. It is likely the %OATTACHMENTS macro is at fault here, if the attachment is actually *attached* and not merely named. Try removing that and see what happens. If that was my fault, I apologize and an addendum to the original message should be posted. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automated response(?)
The reply is using the text area of the HTML. And that is what I need to stop. Is there any way of specifying the reply template that is used in the Sorting Office Auto Reply function? I assume you have navigated to the Actions tab of your filter, and chosen (Checked) the Auto Reply box found there, and that you have engaged the little icon to the left which launches the template for your auto-reply? -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automated response(?)
Hello Mike, On Fri, 13 Jun 2003, at 11:02:46 [GMT -0400] (which was 16:02 in my TimeZone) you wrote: snip entire originating message header The practice of publishing my entire message header here, and in the HTML archives is very much insulting and unappreciated. Kindly cease this practice at once or stop posting until you can figure things out. I am trying to help you, and in return, you both insult me and expose me to even more spam? I think not. A most unhappy, Mike -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automated response(?)
Hello Mike, Friday, June 13, 2003, 11:17:52 AM, you wrote: The practice of publishing my entire message header here, and in the HTML archives is very much insulting and unappreciated. I am trying to help you, and in return, you both insult me and expose me to even more spam? It is my understanding that email addresses, even in message bodies, are now concealed in the TBUDL web archives. Can anyone confirm? One thing is certain. A simple meta name=robot content=none won't work any more, and unless there is serious and sophisticated arrest of those things, the e-mail addresses within the body of messages could be harvested. I will await a reply from the management of the HTML archive. But you know? This is an excellent demonstration of exactly how even someone with indeed a modicum of discretion can be sucked into the Spam alleyways of this thing called e-mail and once thought to be the greatest thing since sliced toast for an inbox beating. E-mail is doing the impossible however--it's managing to kill the United States Post Office by driving postage prices through the roof with adjustments every few months, and turning it into a small package forwarding shop. Regarding my objection to Kichael's inclusion of my personal e-mail in the body of his post, he replied Opps, Sorry. Mistakes happen. These sorts of mistakes do permanent inbox damage and I am extremely unhappy at the moment. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: A Useful spam filter
snip The filtering system you presented, if I remember correctly, rejects all HTML email out of hand. This seems kinda draconian to me. I'll bet a lot of those rejections are false positives. POPFile actually reads the HTML and can correctly distinguish spam-HTML from non-spam-HTML. To this author, e-mail is text; HTML belongs on the web; HTML in e-mail is spam. Read my lips: Not a thing draconian about that logic. Anyway, that's my (limited) experience. As you say, your experience is limited. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automated response(?)
Confirmed. :-))) I'll be the judge of that, thankyouverymuch by watching, and looking at the source. Regretably I explicitly and emphatically trust no-one in things e-mail and Internet and to put it mildly, I am absolutely furious over the recent open post of my home, private and personal e-mail address on this list, not to mention having the entire header displayed. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automated response(?)
DG It is my understanding that email addresses, even in message DG bodies, are now concealed in the TBUDL web archives. Can anyone DG confirm? Confirmed. :-))) You are aware, I sure, spiders exist programmed to ignore such foolishness as META NAME=robots CONTENT=noindex and all other silly and sophomoric attempts to send them away? You are aware of course that the copyright police and others have superior means of harvesting HTML data of any kind, **meta name robot whatever?** You are aware, of course that spammers are being offered those same tools? It's all a game and as a user, you are not in control. Today, the one with the most money for things Internet, wins. And my e-mail address has just been compromised as I discuss spam eradication methods with the TB! list? Lovely. Just lovely. That's what I get. Is it any wonder I cast broad and all-encompassing nets? Is it any wonder I have no patience to teach a well-intentioned Bayesian filtering program what spam is for chrissakes? For me it's simple: If I don't know you, your e-mail will be deleted unread and you will get an auto-reply describing how to circumvent the filter. If you choose not to read the reply or conform, you and your message can take a hike. It's all so painfully simple a child could do it. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: A Useful spam filter
While in general I agree with your sentiments about HTML email, I do make exceptions for HTML newsletters, untrained family/friends, and the like. In my not-so-limited email experience I would agree that rejecting *all* HTML seems draconian. But if it works for you, so be it. Agreed. So be it. However, I can't agree with the sweeping statement that HTML in e-mail is spam. As the HTML newsletters I subscribe to are in fact solicited and not commercial, they do not fit the standard definition of spam as non-solicited commercial email. They do in my book. They could as easily send you a link. I don't buy HTML e-mail. Period. No compromises. Nor are my uninformed/untrained family/friends sending me unsolicited commercial email when they send me HTML emails. Uninformed/untrained family/friends are, or should be, trainable by a respected and experienced user. However, if we want to play word games, I guess we could refer to anything we feel like as spam. Word games? Oh really? I was present at the creation of e-mail and HTML was against the rules then, just as it is now. I am unwavering on that point and although I respect your views and rights to express them, if you or any of my Uninformed/untrained family/friends send me HTML it will bounce, and if they can't figure that out, they can either telephone me or send me a post card. Simple. Incredibly, wonderfully, simple. Word games? Pulze! No more of this HTML = good stuff with my name on it, eh? -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: A Useful spam filter
MA To this author, e-mail is text; HTML belongs on the web; HTML in MA e-mail is spam. No, it is not. Fine. Those who created e-mail, and I was present for that, are declared the losers, and those who want to send pretty flowers and silly pink backgrounds with their e-mails (never mind that it gets bloated 10-times necessary size), are declared in your book victorious and I, with my stodgy old ideas of what e-mail is and should be--am the enemy. There's no need to be paranoid about e-mails. Paranoid/ Please get serious, and stop with the left-handed insults already my young friend. Want me to put your e-mail address on usenet just so you can see what some people have deal with? Of course not. MA Read my lips: Not a thing draconian about that logic. Your rules are way too serious in my opinion. I will defend your right to have an opinion. I will defend your right to express that opinion. Kindly respect my right to have mine and to disagree without insulting me. But if this is that blows your hair back. Go with it! What is that supposed to mean? Do I not watch enough TV to be hip to the new teen slang? -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automated response(?)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Mike, On Fri, 13 Jun 2003, at 12:54:37 GMT -0400 (6/13/2003, 11:54 AM -0600 GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: MA I am absolutely furious over the recent open post of my home, MA private and personal e-mail address on this list, not to mention MA having the entire header displayed. I can understand your feelings. However after going through intrusion with regard to my own on-line experience to a LARGE degree myself, I have come to accept the down side of being on-line with the HUGE up side of being on-line. The resources on-line to learn about advancing technologies and to communicate with friends, family, and associates far exceeds the negatives. I've learned I can't control what other people do, but I can control what I do. Simply stated as long as the UP side far exceeds the DOWN side, I'll stay on-line. When the DOWN side exceeds the UP side I will NOT be on-line although I don't expect this to ever happen. Your experiences may vary. The intrusion of other people into your on-line experience is nothing more than example of the negatives of the human condition. This has always been, and will always be. The only change is the medium upon which it occurs. Your post is intact above. I should frame it. Well said, and I fully agree. Yes, the on-line experience for me has much more up than down and that's why I am here. Nice post. Happy to have seeded it. ;-) -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Email addresses in the Archive (was Re: Automated response(?))
Before you blow a gasket, take a look: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg57120.html. This message in the archive included email addresses in the body. Why don't you have a look and see if you can tell me what they were? I cannot see nor determine them. They were hidden by the posting software. Well done. Some steam relieved and I salute your method. But before I rest my aggravation completely, I want to see the post in the archive and it's not there yet. Other valid information relative to my mail paths were presented which could subject servers in the advertised chain to DOS attack. If I want my headers made public, I'll do it myself. Tell you what, if I'm banging worthless drums here, send me an e-mail, and let me publish your entire header back to the list so we all can see exactly how it moves through the system, okay? Put the word pass in the subject line to skirt my filters. Blow a gasket? Pulze. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automated response(?)
Wow. I've been on this list for well over a year now and for the most part, the tone has been quite friendly. sarcasmWelcome to the list Mike!/sarcasm Please, if we're all causing you so much grief, find another e-mail client and go bother their forum. Same way everywhere. Join us, but don't express any upstream opinions, and certainly don't say anything that might upset someone. I have never once been critical of TB! I will leave without hesitation when invited to leave by a moderator, not an individual listee as you have just done. Many thanks. Please read my posts, and if you have a problem, filter me. If you don't know how, read my posts. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automated response(?)
So your best bet is to stop posting. Ah, good! Without a single personal attack, and without a single defamatory word about TB! This is officially my second unfortunate invitation to stop posting here. Thanks, so very much. The view of e-mail with the fuzzy-wuzzy glasses removed is quite different from my side, wanna see? No? Fine. If I told you not to eat that apple because there was a worm visible to me, you could either take my word for it and have eyes in two places, or disregard my comment and discover the worm for yourself after biting into it. Your comment suggests you don't want to see anything but the good side. Being a Pollyanna is one thing. Rejecting valid input is another. As I said in another post, when a list moderator invites me to leave, I will--without fuss. Petition them if you like, you know who they are. Even if archive conceals addresses in mail bodies (very bad, btw. look into HTML source at the bottom of the page), every spammer can easily simply subscribe this list and harvest addresses w/o end. This is a known fact for _EVERY_ mailing list that keeps the original From: header. Ain't life grand? So as much as your exercises about spam filtering are appretiated in list context you now can stop becoming personal (e.g. mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) and dooming every single thing you don't like and try to concentrate on the essentials here. Excuse me? What did you just say? If spam filtering and privacy protection are not part of what's perceived to be essentials here, then I clearly misunderstand what TB! and its filtering methods are about. So what, I should praise this wonderful thing called e-mail? Get serious, young fellow. I bet here're not many people subscribed that like spam and even lesser that try to provoke increase in spam in anybodys inbox, so a smart _hint_ (in opposite to a rough rant) should be enough in most cases. This explicitely excludes, of course, repeating offenders but I'm still about to see such here ... In the real world a smart _hint_ will reach those thinking individuals who carefully read, can understand the spirit of the author, and can walk away without throwing stones or inviting him/her to simply leave. For the majority of busy folk, the message needs to be repeated. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automated response(?)
Hello Peter, On Fri, 13 Jun 2003, at 19:33:02 GMT +0200 (6/13/2003, 12:33 PM -0600 GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Regretably I explicitly and emphatically trust no-one in things e-mail So your best bet is to stop posting. Agreed. My, we are collecting a whole list of people wanting me to go away. Sad, actually. Everyone wants the comments sugar-coated? No one wants to be on the receiving end of polite and civil dialog and debate? Fine. I think I'm getting the message but I will wait for Marck to banish me. And when of if he does, I will ask he remove my photo from the gallery. C'Mon folks! Grow up! Have a dialog! Quit with the namby-pamby, blind goody-goody e-mail is the salvation of man stuff already! It is NOT! Together we can work to delay what I think will be the eventual morphing of e-mail into much less than we have today! You may not agree with me, but my comments here are to increase the usefulness and longevity of e-mail, not to destroy it. And I am not now and never was interested in winning a popularity contest. Love me or hate me, I could care less. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: A Useful spam filter
The era of 28k modems are over. Get on with it! I could not care less if a message is 1 kb or 10 kb, or God forbid 1 Mb. If your logic continues, very soon even the present internet infrastructure will be inadequate. I have a commercial broadband account and am unafraid of a 200+ Megabyte download. My comments are borne of a broader awareness of the future of the net, which for some reason feel compelled to protect. Get on with it!!?? I think you and I are finished communicating. Listen old man! Looking at your e-mail rules I tend to think that you are the kind of man who is capable of doing that. That was uncalled for. That was insulting. I am sorry, I do not even know what you mean by that. Probably my English is not good enough for that. I have not insulted you. But the read my lips expression was a bit too harsh. Please read my email and think again! Sorry, Read my lips is perhaps too strong but I don't need to think again. I do fairly well in live debates. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: A Useful spam filter
I have stated that while in general I do not like HTML email, but am willing to make specific exceptions. I have stated that for that reason, for my purposes I would consider a rejection of *all* HTML email as draconian. I have stated that classifying all HTML email as spam does not fit the standard definition of spam. Nowhere have I stated HTML = good. Sorry Dave. I view dictionaries, as the late lexicographer David P. Guralnick said Dictionaries are historical documents, recording where a language was at the time it went to print (or words to that effect. The great Ambrose Bierce had yet another definition of the dictionary as A malevolent literary device which makes a language hard and in-elastic. What I am leading up to, is that I reject your definition of spam. Spam is a personal thing and we are dealing in semantics here. You don't want all HTML to be viewed as Spam. I do. End of story. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
The Bat!: A Better Mousetrap
Hello List, Good to be back with you. Though not a complete package, I am having good results catching Spam with TheBat! using only a very few filters. I wanted to share the concept. Forgive me if this has all been said before and I doubt this is a new discovery. To effect the broadest net of capture requires some creativity and what I have below may be of value to some. That is not to say I believe myself above average in this, however my filters are catching all Spam--not just some of it. Yes, occasionally an innocent bystander gets caught in the harvest too but those are presented with an avenue of correction. A work-in-progress, these are my Incoming Mail filters in order of processing: //Bounce// This filter is first on my list to arrest bounced mail and prevent an auto-reply round-robin. It looks for the word returned in Kluges and the following Alternatives (also Kluges): bounce, undeliverable, un-deliverable, nobody, unknown. Hits go to a bounce folder and are reviewed to make certain the bounce is spam-related. That same folder, if re-filtered, will trash the contents in a click or two. It is a very easy filter to refine as needed. The Action is to delete the message from the server. //Spam// Looks for the word undisclosed in Kluges, and as alternatives, my personal list of Mailers the sophomoric spammer may have been dumb enough not to hack out. Other filters (below) will catch Spam in different ways, but I keep this one high on the list just for personal recreation, entertainment, and spam-trap practice. //HTML// Here's a fairly wide-reaching net. It looks first for HTML in kluges, or in Alternatives for multipart/alternative which is how most unwanted commercial spam is content-formatted so as to be readable in either HTML or plain text. Also included, is multipart/related which fetches graphics or (??) from elsewhere, and the seldom-used multipart/parallel. multipart/mixed is excluded and allowed to pass this filter because it is the format of attached photos and other often desirable in-line exchanges from legitimate friendly correspondents. If caught by this filter, the following and immediate auto-response is triggered: -- This is an auto-reply to your recent e-mail to Mike Apsey. Your message was automatically deleted without being read because HTML formatting was detected as: %OATTACHMENTS. Please remove your HTML formatting and try again using plain text. -- IMPORTANT: This filter will indeed snatch each and every HTML formatted bit of e-mail entering your inbox, including those from customers, legitimate companies, family, friends, and associates. It is therefore important to move it beneath your personal sorting/filtering list if you're worried that certain of your regular pen-pals will take offense. Personally, either they can remove the HTML, or take me off their list AFAIC. Still, it's wise not to be indignant in the auto-reply. Notice I am neither indignant nor apologetic above, citing the automatic nature of the response and reply. NOTE: If you do not wish to encourage family and friends to stop using HTML when corresponding with you, you may move this filter beneath your personal sort/filter list. WARNING: Before deciding where to place this filter, you may want to review your accounts payable for incoming bills formatted in HTML. Of the uncounted many I have received past 3-years, only one, Verizon (formerly GTE), has sent an HTML bill and they were singly moved above the filter for now. They may offer an opt-out of HTML, I just haven't checked but will. //All personal sorting/office filters go here// My suggested filters are far-reaching, very broad, and painfully effective. That's especially true of those which follow. May I remind you it's advisable and important to see my suggested filters here do not interfere with your personal settings, existing filters, and possibly blossoming love relationships. //Bulk Mail// This is the last stop. The black hole. E-mail purgatory. This filter essentially unplugs my mailbox from unknown senders once and for all. Irrevocably and better than an unlisted telephone number. It catches *all* spam missed elsewhere and yes, even some personal correspondence from new friends. = WARNING: This filter is very dangerous because it essentially invokes an auto-reply e-mail screening. = If not re-directed by the hundred or more filters above it, all e-mail arrives here, and triggers the following immediate auto response: -- * MAIL AUTO-DELETED UNREAD - SENDER UNKNOWN * Mail from unknown originating addresses is no longer accepted. If you believe you
Re: A Useful spam filter
snip I want to understand EXACTLY how my mail is triaged and why, particularly on my critical accounts. Unfortunately, it is my sad yet considered opinion the choice to do your own filtering is evaporating. My friend told me boastfully about how his Iowa (USA) ISP was Filtering his mail with a bayesian filter. I pointed him to a free bayesian filter he could operate locally, knowing exactly what was getting bounced. The face of e-mail is changing and the usefulness of the once-innocent Internet is fast deteriorating into a sleazebag carney sideshow, populated by hawkers, stalkers, con-men and idiots. A grumpy old man's jaded opinion? Or is it the opinion of someone unafraid to speak his mind? You decide. Better still, do your own filtering while you still can. Zero replies and zero comments on my earlier list post, which although posted in good spirit with a 3-hour compose time, was evidently a waste of time in the minds of the target audience, eh? What else is new. Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: A Useful spam filter
It's easy to get jaded when you do something for the common good with little or no return. Trust me, I know. This is a busy list. Thanks for your comments. Jaded is indeed a good word for what I was feeling at the time my reply was written. I would add only that to work as designed, and after a breaking-in period, my all-or-nothing filters should be, in fact, engaged with finality. There is one caveat, which is the mail dispatched from an address added to the permit line, but replied-to from another address within the organization. It's an imperfect world; imperfect filters; an imperfect author. And yet I am well fed-up with people taking me for the sitting e-mail duck. Spam here has been running at about 50/day. Disgusting. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Message Archive?
I would *never* trout a fellow moderator. Hardly the done thing! g Quite a batch of diehard IRC alumni here I see--what with all this trout-slapping. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: How to set up an autocomplete for a mail list?
Jan, JR Are there other personalizing touches besides greeting by JR name, title, address, etc. that I'm not aware of? I, for one, do not like everybody I send multiple-copy mail to to also see the e-mail addresses of everyone else in the mailing, as a matter of courtesy. I wish more people would honor that. *That* is an important part of personalizing touches you have overlooked and the suggestions will help that issue as well. -- My Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) DH/DSS PGP Key: http://web.tampabay.rr.com/musings/pgp.asc [Tip the world over on its side and everything loose will land in Los Angeles. FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT] Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: GMT Time Stamp
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Sudip, Thursday, June 27, 2002, 5:15:31 AM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: SP While I'm at it, can anyone reccommend a good HTML editor (with as SP smaller a foorprint as possible) that I can use to create an SP occassional HTML messages. Two suggesions: 1. http://www.arachnoid.com/arachnophilia/ 2. Early freeware versions of Ray Bradbury's Homesite 1.2 are still floating around the net if you look creatively. This is the core that has migrated through Corporate America all the way up to the latest Macromedia DreamweaverMX. Learn the basic Homesite and you will be prepared should your desires ever take you to Dreamweaver. - -- My Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) DH/DSS PGP Key: http://home.tampabay.rr.com/musings/ -or- DH/DSS PGP Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=key_request [Failure is not an option. It is a privilege reserved only for those who try.] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0x26C51F27 Comment: Fingerprint: 62E1 E4F5 80C8 6825 8DC4 8C1D A402 E6B0 26C5 1F27 iQA/AwUBPRrnG6QC5rAmxR8nEQK83ACfXLu+FzTuYLn0CQS1vj4zC28j4wIAn3F0 2vW7GNeIGLaVgr5YSBr35WUE =w/BZ -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Check Mail problems with q?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi List, All this week, I thought my ISP's mail service was squirrely and blamed it on the rain. I now discover, by checking with my previous mail program (Agent 1.91) there is nothing wrong with the server. It's TB! I would like to go back to k but deleted it with the upgrade to q. Could someone please point me to k? TIA - -- Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) DH/DSS PGP Key: http://home.tampabay.rr.com/musings/ -or- DH/DSS PGP Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=key_request -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0x26C51F27 Comment: Fingerprint: 62E1 E4F5 80C8 6825 8DC4 8C1D A402 E6B0 26C5 1F27 iQA/AwUBPRrqp6QC5rAmxR8nEQI0owCfRkSfDPkjP52FsGxuIz6yYLScZb0An360 vIrox15hjFSCSV93b5JDEkQe =E8Nw -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: Check Mail problems with q?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mike, Thursday, June 27, 2002, 6:36:14 AM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: MA All this week, I thought my ISP's mail service was squirrely and MA blamed it on the rain. I now discover, by checking with my MA previous mail program (Agent 1.91) there is nothing wrong with the MA server. It's TB! WRONG! Never mind. I turned off NAV e-mail scanning so TB! could handle it and that's what was going on. Somehow NAV2002 halted my mail checks. Sorry list. - -- My Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) DH/DSS PGP Key: http://home.tampabay.rr.com/musings/ -or- DH/DSS PGP Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=key_request [Martyrdom does not end something; it is only the beginning. GANDHI ] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0x26C51F27 Comment: Fingerprint: 62E1 E4F5 80C8 6825 8DC4 8C1D A402 E6B0 26C5 1F27 iQA/AwUBPRrsw6QC5rAmxR8nEQJeZgCg6OdBXADy+zRhfT4vCg/D1tKZDGMAoIrE Cs04MwP3rKmQd6WtCMXgge38 =Hg5U -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: ROT13 support
Januk, Tuesday, June 25, 2002, 10:45:49 PM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: MA MUA = TB! v%THEBATVERSION (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) MA %WINDOWSPLATFORMNAME MA %WINDOWSMAJORVERSION.%WINDOWSMINORVERSION.%WINDOWSBUILDNUMBER MA (%WINDOWSCSDVERSION) MA DH/DSS PGP Key: http://home.tampabay.rr.com/musings/ -or- MA DH/DSS PGP Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=key_request JA It looks like you put your template in an odd place. My bet is JA that you have a signature file and you used %PUT to insert it into JA your reply. If that's the case, change %PUT to %INCLUDE. Thank you. I think what I did was to that into the message instead of my template like an idiot. I was fiddling with my templates and updating them. -- My Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) PGP Key mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=Key_Request Be careful what you set your heart upon - for it will surely be yours. BALDWIN Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: ROT13 support
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Thomas, Wednesday, June 26, 2002, 2:10:59 AM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: MA Quite easy to read with Agent installed and a copy/paste. ROT-13 is, MA of course, a good over-the-shoulder security feature but that's it. TF I don't see it as a security feature but a toy, which is sometimes TF fun. I sometimes use it when writing to friends/family with computers in high traffic areas as a prying-eyes caution, that's what I meant. I think using the word security was a poor choice and you are correct that it's just a toy although it could possibly trip-up some kiddie packet-sniffers. TF V pna nqq pbzzragf gung arjovrf pna'g ernq. Be pna gurl? Safe to say this TB! newbie can. :-) - -- My Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) DH/DSS PGP Key: http://home.tampabay.rr.com/musings/ -or- DH/DSS PGP Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=key_request [If the human brain were so simple that we could understand it, we would be so simple that we couldn't. WATSON ] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0x26C51F27 Comment: Fingerprint: 62E1 E4F5 80C8 6825 8DC4 8C1D A402 E6B0 26C5 1F27 iQA/AwUBPRm7zqQC5rAmxR8nEQK1oQCgxQfpXKxXhsN7ib6UJGJ6E1JCvnQAoLaF sbuMkXX9lMnSsh1SLGhNtN8A =ZF7B -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: ROT13 support
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Thomas, Wednesday, June 26, 2002, 2:10:59 AM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: MA Quite easy to read with Agent installed and a copy/paste. ROT-13 is, MA of course, a good over-the-shoulder security feature but that's it. TF I don't see it as a security feature but a toy, which is sometimes TF fun. TF V pna nqq pbzzragf gung arjovrf pna'g ernq. Be pna gurl? Excuse me list. I see I had some quoted text wrapping issues on my other response to this message and so thought I would make some adjustments to my wrap settings and try again on one known to be wrap-challenged. - -- My Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) DH/DSS PGP Key: http://home.tampabay.rr.com/musings/ -or- DH/DSS PGP Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=key_request [What do you call a boomerang that doesn't work? A stick! KIRCHENBAUM ] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0x26C51F27 Comment: Fingerprint: 62E1 E4F5 80C8 6825 8DC4 8C1D A402 E6B0 26C5 1F27 iQA/AwUBPRnAIKQC5rAmxR8nEQI5BgCgiTj5oCAQaFkjb65h2y2g1NVVSxsAoOu3 XLyMN/0jtmTNu/e9/78ryLl6 =WGuv -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Word wrap help, please.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi List, As some of you might have seen, I am having some TB! wrapping issues, which are surely cockpit problems. Here are my settings: TB! Wraps at 70 PGP Wraps clear-signed at column 72 Editor/Viewer preferences has only Autowrap checked. Recommendations and comments most appreciated. I seem to run into this when using the Initial for quoted text, and signing messages, which may be a clue, but I thought I'd ask the experts. - -- Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) DH/DSS PGP Key: http://home.tampabay.rr.com/musings/ -or- DH/DSS PGP Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=key_request [If you look like your passport photo, you're too ill to travel. KOMMEN] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0x26C51F27 Comment: Fingerprint: 62E1 E4F5 80C8 6825 8DC4 8C1D A402 E6B0 26C5 1F27 iQA/AwUBPRnCXqQC5rAmxR8nEQJmOgCfUOukqZNYkbEGSCyqND5geHjZW/sAn0Wx 5lQoQ579bupz8y5IhV3c1o8S =MAgl -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: ROT13 support
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Thomas, Wednesday, June 26, 2002, 2:10:59 AM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: TF Hello Mike, TF On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 21:32:43 -0400 GMT (26/06/02, 08:32 +0700 GMT), TF Mike Apsey wrote: MA Quite easy to read with Agent installed and a copy/paste. ROT-13 is, MA of course, a good over-the-shoulder security feature but that's it. TF I don't see it as a security feature but a toy, which is sometimes TF fun. TF V pna nqq pbzzragf gung arjovrf pna'g ernq. Be pna gurl? One more try on the problem post to see if disabling the PGP wrap works. Thank you for bearing with me and the help. My incoming mail server has been only intermittently available since our deluge of Monday past here in Tampa but I am able to read replies to my posted word-wrap thread through the web. So we shall see with this one. This list has its own templates, thus posting to it for a real test makes it a bit easier. - -- My Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) DH/DSS PGP Key: http://home.tampabay.rr.com/musings/ -or- DH/DSS PGP Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=key_request [If it's worth doing, it's worth overdoing! G. HARRY STINE] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0x26C51F27 Comment: Fingerprint: 62E1 E4F5 80C8 6825 8DC4 8C1D A402 E6B0 26C5 1F27 iQA/AwUBPRnOiaQC5rAmxR8nEQJoRwCgxuL6D+w3RkpRl4c2B5liDgL2IPIAoKp0 qoGdnrimJ8yWIZDUrfZUZm/G =rwBa -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: Word wrap help, please.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Peter, Wednesday, June 26, 2002, 9:48:09 AM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: PP Disable it, unless you _really_ need it for PGP rewrapping texts from other PP applications than The Bat!. If you do need the wrapping nowhere else but in PP conjunction with The Bat! let The Bat! wrap instead of PGP. It does a great PP job on this issue. Thank you Peter, Nick, and DG. It was the PGP wrap and as you see things worked when I disabled that. - -- My Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) DH/DSS PGP Key: http://home.tampabay.rr.com/musings/ -or- DH/DSS PGP Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=key_request [Enthusiasm is the greatest asset in the world. It beats money and power and influence. CHESTER] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0x26C51F27 Comment: Fingerprint: 62E1 E4F5 80C8 6825 8DC4 8C1D A402 E6B0 26C5 1F27 iQA/AwUBPRn4raQC5rAmxR8nEQL/YgCgrvJ3IheQRySHv4ZeFmEsHNzguMQAoJge CRn0DloiMYazOGQy793dMq7D =QgEA -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: Word wrap help, please.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Peter, Wednesday, June 26, 2002, 9:48:09 AM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: PP Disable it, unless you _really_ need it for PGP rewrapping texts PP from other applications than The Bat!. If you do need the wrapping PP nowhere else but in conjunction with The Bat! let The Bat! wrap PP instead of PGP. It does a great job on this issue. Okay, this time I manually wrapped the above line (Alt+L). I tried the %WRAPPED=%Quotes but it didn't seem to do anything. I have tbud in my address book, and theres a template there. I also have a template in my tbud folder for those messages I might reply to from that folder but not listbound. I'm doing something wrong. Notice the quote included below. Notice there's a space before the closing bracket, and that space does not appear in either my tbud adddress book reply template or in my tbud folder reply template. Color me confused again. sigh - -- My Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) DH/DSS PGP Key: http://home.tampabay.rr.com/musings/ -or- DH/DSS PGP Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=key_request [If it's good they'll stop making it. BLOCK ] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0x26C51F27 Comment: Fingerprint: 62E1 E4F5 80C8 6825 8DC4 8C1D A402 E6B0 26C5 1F27 iQA/AwUBPRn+UqQC5rAmxR8nEQJkEgCfUa/GzliBPeEjtLsSCOZrfLZtfHYAoNsi xPcACO/Sp2zzaofYHhknVmyK =zd3V -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: First post is a Thank You!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 DG, Saturday, June 22, 2002, 10:59:42 AM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: DRS Sorry. This reply is kind of like closing the barn door after the DRS horse is out but DRS Always, ALWAYS, back up your keypairs to floppy or to a backup DRS directory on your hard drive. I've seen many that have many DRS keypairs residing on key servers because of the failure to backup DRS keypairs so they simply create a new one because most can't DRS remember the paraphrase to delete the unused keypairs. All true and good information. In my previous use of PGP with Agent, I was most careful about that but it has been several years since using that key, and I *do* still have it and will import it to the new install. Also, unless someone uploaded to a server without my permission or knowledge, the newest pair in question was never used. In all my years of PGP, I have never used a key server, and prefer to give my Public Key (I have had only one) to those requesting them via e-mail. That does not mean, of course, that they do not exist on the key server network. In fact, I may check that later this afternoon after adding my original (saved to floppy) keypair to this new install. If someone uploaded my dead key, my apologies. I made no attempt to back it up for it was: 1.) New 2). Used here only in my first couple messages (wrongly). 3.) Generated in 7.0.3 which I was not sure would work with it's older cousin version.4.) Never uploaded to a Key Server that I was aware. and finally 5.) Immediately identified by me as not working at all with my TB! integration. 6). A mere 3 experimental hours old. Please don't think me defensive, or ungrateful to you for your assistance and suggestions. Also, none of those are excuses. Your information is important. I merely wish to demonstrate to the list that I am not (quite) as sloppy nor naive with PGP as it may appear but I am very new with using PGP as an integrated program with TB!. - -- Thank you Kindly, Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) PGP Key mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=Key_Request -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0x26C51F27 Comment: Fingerprint: 62E1 E4F5 80C8 6825 8DC4 8C1D A402 E6B0 26C5 1F27 iQA/AwUBPRSgSKQC5rAmxR8nEQIJSwCfZu6XsEKyGpnfa1X8PMOs0EhreTIAn3dR n3VFnUOyAFPz0NmerU3JeZWC =X9PP -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Filtering Supressed recipient
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi List, I think I saw somewhere in the archive or FAQ how to filter and exclude spam whose Recipient field has been suppressed. Any pointer appreciated. Also, I have posted my DH/DSS Public Key on my website (No RSA) as you see below but anyone wanting to get it from the horse's mouth can sure e-mail me. Anyone wanting to otherwise identify me as the real animal, I'm in the telephone book in Tampa, listed. I would appreciate having my key signed by somebody here and will do whatever I can to facilitate that. Also, uploading a signed key server is fine but please ask. I'll figure this out (see quote). - -- Mike Apsey Tampa MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) PGP DH/DSS Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=Key_Request or PGP DH/DSS Key: http://home.tampabay.rr.com/musings/ It is the cat that teaches the mouse, the finer points of catching mice -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0x26C51F27 Comment: Fingerprint: 62E1 E4F5 80C8 6825 8DC4 8C1D A402 E6B0 26C5 1F27 iQA/AwUBPRTR8qQC5rAmxR8nEQKjQACeOIkD7VX8u3Xsb8nxV06n8ueKoYYAmwQg sXysZnzrjSScDOX/cVD6CjLd =szz2 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: Filtering Supressed recipient
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Allie, Saturday, June 22, 2002, 6:09:10 PM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: MA I think I saw somewhere in the archive or FAQ how to filter and MA exclude spam whose Recipient field has been suppressed. Any MA pointer appreciated. ACM As your string search, look for a recipient string using the regular ACM expression: ACM ^To:.* ACM Look in the Kludges ACM And Presence : No. Perfect, and I thank you! - -- Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) DH/DSS PGP Key mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=Key_Request or DH/DSS PGP Key http://home.tampabay.rr.com/musings/ Be the change you want to see in the world. Mahatma Ghandi -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0x26C51F27 Comment: Fingerprint: 62E1 E4F5 80C8 6825 8DC4 8C1D A402 E6B0 26C5 1F27 iQA/AwUBPRT9EqQC5rAmxR8nEQKTwgCfV5Ik9ftnc6ctnmEsILDSOTmOZngAoOYQ fx7QxpTH+Yq3p2/5mMrqIRFE =rJW5 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
First post is a Thank You!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: MD5 Hello List! I have lurked the archive these past few months and thought now that I'm getting comfy with filters, I'd subscribe and check-in to say thank you. I purchased TB! only recently, having migrated from Agent, which was a primary e-mail (multiple instance) for me since 1994's Agent99 rolled into an e-mail client a year later. I made the move to TB! as soon as I bought it and have never looked back. Now that I'm comfortable with it, I have begun some filtering exercises. All works as expected. Excellent software, fairly priced. TB! has been incredibly stable for me. Never a problem. Of course, no skins or such here. G I love it just the way it is with only minor suggestions, which have been sent to RitLabs. Thanks folks. Nice to know if I get into a jam there's some place to turn. Please, if you see something amiss with this first post, please holler. Welp, here goes! - -- Peace, Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) PGP Key mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=key_request -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUAPRNanf4YPXhWP9U5AQGsjgQAoYAxbaOy68j3lgsQhqo1b96wT0vQRowv MkvNYL7NWHoYAm3bda0VUr3QDRMCyLTZSWB+iI1+V3OKVy36RYwujVySBL3Wyu3q iNn995adw6WbYIHcnMaKlJQLVUms/fHYNb3+mBL6PyE/mdA5tu33UPA4EgUW1tVj DY5IcmfiTwA= =Y0QD -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: First post is a Thank You!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: MD5 Melissa, Friday, June 21, 2002, 2:40:22 PM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: MR The key you used to sign your message is: MR 0x563FD539 MR ...and the key I received from your key request was: MR 0x4EBD8098 MR oops? Yes, oops. Sorry. The last one is right. I'm not used to Open PGP and had done messed-up! I think all is well now. - -- Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) PGP Key mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=Key_Request -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUAPRN4hv4YPXhWP9U5AQF+IgP7BzRC45NGARcWol+60zmJXYKOHx6ULiwN VqzCILFZ+yd6GsuV3CXim8AH1gA7M5TWEGSw/gb/h8sOlKqTWK9O0NEqkiUwZQDq rfN9imM2pnaJQVde/ZO7+365w7CHrP0Tv6NhCq7mt0tBfAls2gamIh+CpFIqTzBr K0ue49gwk2k= =H8bf -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: First post is a Thank You!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: MD5 Melissa, Friday, June 21, 2002, 2:40:22 PM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: MR 0x563FD539 MR ...and the key I received from your key request was: MR 0x4EBD8098 MR oops? Actually oops2. Not the last one above, but the last one I sent. The first one (0x563FD539)is correct--for the record. I think. :-( Ho boy! Bear with me folks. Sorry for the traffic. - -- Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) PGP Key mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=Key_Request Old men enjoy giving advice when they are no longer capable of serving as a bad example. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUAPRN6Av4YPXhWP9U5AQF+zQP/WD9phLUPy/C6uNYMQ0X2ajpPMlEX969c e5i70fgs8/JpOVR34Kll1MNUXmzE3PKEoOopLMtmmI8YBOIVRt/JkJqMSeLj5Se0 EwGAVYm5HtB/qu4AIlmi6JYLu3YUREWsI3QlhyXTIrkI6BDdiuNHj/BH0dLcYhar bQtYJfB0Kx8= =V6eh -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: First post is a Thank You!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Nick, Friday, June 21, 2002, 7:58:46 PM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: NA Well, the Key I received is still wrong... it cannot verify your NA signature: Key ID 0x26C51F27 is the one you sent me, while NA 0x4EBD8098 is the one you sent Melissa. Appears as if you have 3 NA different Keys. My apologies. With help from Melissa I nailed the problem with my installation of PGP 7.0.3. My bad. That has now been fixed. I hope Please send a new Key request. My key requests aren't quite automated yet, but I'm close. Thank you for commenting. I still have some work to do and at the moment, I have guests, so it may be a bit. - -- Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) PGP Key mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=Key_Request -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ iQA/AwUBPRPD2KQC5rAmxR8nEQI0EQCglLKyFeio6jytPzTp7wapTyUs12EAmQFt ZkZu0CzJYC0LhQfQMW04gDi0 =l5GY -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: First post is a Thank You!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Nick, Friday, June 21, 2002, 10:41:48 PM, you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: NA In Reference to your Posting on Friday, June 21 2002 at 05:24 PM PDT, My apologies. With help from Melissa I nailed the problem with my installation of PGP 7.0.3. My bad. That has now been fixed. I hope Please send a new Key request. NA Ok, I was able to verify the message I am replying to which you signed NA with Key ID 0x26C51F27, but I still cannot verify the first few messages you NA posted in this thread. Apparently you used Key ID 0x563FD539 which you NA have not made available: My earlier messages were attempts to use my PGP 7.0.3 with TB! and it could not be made to work. I changed PGP versions to PGP 6x and things began working. The earlier key was destroyed with the un-install of PGP 7 so please disregard that one and forgive my bumpy start. I still have some things to tweak, and my key request is not yet automatic. For now, I'm giving up on today with thanks to all. - -- Best! Mike MUA = TB! v1.60q (www.RitLabs.com/the_bat) Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) PGP Key mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=Key_Request -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0x26C51F27 Comment: Fingerprint: 62E1 E4F5 80C8 6825 8DC4 8C1D A402 E6B0 26C5 1F27 iQA/AwUBPRPosaQC5rAmxR8nEQKAigCfcIT+qNugxaTMutzH6OKFx+yXDngAoI2I xgwMmIWr86vQh2VNjwyTf3ok =8oq6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
