Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sat, 26 Feb 2005, @ @ at 00:38:01 +, when MFPA wrote: I remember somebody who said only email me with this exact subject line, or your messages will be junked by my spam filters. Mind, he hosted a software download site and provided email support. Well yes, this is particularly useful for webmasters, and this part I didn't discuss with Richard since he has no any address used this way. It's just enough to write a short warning on the place the mailto link is set, and to use a form like this: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] and then you filter both against subject and address, or just against subject. If needed might be added body part as well. I see also that newsletter senders are all the more aware of the SPAM problem, and that they are reminding a new subscriber to put the newsletter address (or some special piece of code from their headers) on the 'white list'. - -- Mica PGP key uploaded at: http://pgp.mit.edu/ once just before breakfast :flagmica: [Earth LOG: 178 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux, and with Bochs 2.1.1 with a small DLX Linux; and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCIFDt9q62QPd3XuIRAkgRAKCAPDbERgb+vlnegbYOks3NyqIkTQCfXYOL WIH9D4QJ3MBb6koru/tB5aI= =NIFp -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
Hallo Richard, On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 05:55:16 +0500GMT (25-2-2005, 1:55 +0100, where I live), you wrote: MM This way you practically can filter everything using just Selective MM Download filters. RHS In the beginning, I'll just filter those that don't pass to a junk RHS folder I can check periodically. Some of my friends are slow learners. RHS :-) You could send them a message automatically. Since they're friends of yours you'll probably have have them in your address book (AB) or maybe even in an AB group. So the only thing you need to do is to create a filter that checks for an incorrect To: header and whether the sender is in your AB/AB-group. As action you send a reply that tells the sender of the opriginal message that the message hasn't been read, since it triggered your spam filter. Of course you don't move the message to your junk folder, but to a semi junk folder, so that you know that messages in that folder are more impoortant than real junk... -- Groetjes, Roelof The usual reward for saving the world is the chance to do it again. The Bat! 3.0.9.1 Deep Alpha Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 1 pop3 account, server on LAN pgprejj8A5FOU.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Fri, 25 Feb 2005, @ @ at 05:55:16 +0500, when Richard H. Stoddard wrote: For some reason I was assuming it would be more complicated than it turned out to be. I guess that's because I usually read e-mail in the morning while drinking my first cups of coffee. (-: With or without the coffee, it indeed looks more complicated than it is, and it was the reason why I condensed it for my self: filter against what you accept, don't bother with what you do not. In the beginning, I'll just filter those that don't pass to a junk folder I can check periodically. Some of my friends are slow learners. :-) Many combinations are possible. Roelof gave some of them. Anyway, the result is cute: zero SPAM on this side of Internet. - -- Mica PGP key uploaded at: http://pgp.mit.edu/ once just before breakfast :banana: [Earth LOG: 177 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux, and with Bochs 2.1.1 with a small DLX Linux; and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCH58X9q62QPd3XuIRAtqSAJ96Agbob9YGwAS5DboUXF1IuP4z1wCfRGdB Tr4m2aTV5lXVXn6dsE/rav0= =5Sjw -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
Hi On Friday 25 February 2005 at 9:56:40 PM, in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Mica Mijatovic wrote: For some reason I was assuming it would be more complicated than it turned out to be. I guess that's because I usually read e-mail in the morning while drinking my first cups of coffee. (-: With or without the coffee, it indeed looks more complicated than it is, and it was the reason why I condensed it for my self: filter against what you accept, don't bother with what you do not. I remember somebody who said only email me with this exact subject line, or your messages will be junked by my spam filters. Mind, he hosted a software download site and provided email support. -- Best regards, MFPAmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Tue, 22 Feb 2005, @ @ at 06:16:14 +0500, when Richard H. Stoddard wrote: MM Okay then, less problems to solve. Tell me, do you have some MM friends, or business partners who do not address you properly, MM namely not using your full name (or a screen/nick name defined by MM yourself) in TO (or CC) field, but using only the address of yours? I assume I'm like most folks: I have my friends and others in my address book and flagged so they go to the known folder; I have white-listed mailing lists like TBUDL; but I do receive mail that is not spam from others who are not in my book but whom I know or were referred to me by friends. My friends use all sorts of nicknames for me, including only the address; I can try to train them, but will have to deal with the third on a case-by-case basis. Pardon my pause, Richard, I had to interrupt for a...moment. OK, actually you would have to train a bit your friends then, and to tell them (if they already do not do so) to use only (nick)names you use in your FROM and REPLY-TO fields. When they are giving your address to third parties, they would have, of course, to use those very same forms. Then you simply put all those forms of addressing on a white list too, and that's it. Nothing which is not addressed this way can pass in. This part, with friends, is, potentially, 'hardest' one, although it is not very hard. My experiences are that my friends/correspondents pretty easily accept and understand why I do so, and often they themselves start to practise similar method. Some of them initially mumble but they shortly after accept it too. You, therefore, have to train them, your friends, and they will train all others. (-: So, there is no need for dealing with the third on a case-by-case basis. So you actually have 2 groups here: messages addressed to you personally and those coming to/from various lists, addressed to these lists. If you receive some newsletters then you add them too. ~~~ It's only important that no message arrives *only* to your plain address (since this is form which spammers use; and sometimes adding a 'random' faked nick name, or name). ~~~ This way you practically can filter everything using just Selective Download filters. There is no 'fear' of losing some 'important' mail this way, since if someone wants to contact you, for enough serious reasons, s/he will definitely take care about way s/he is addressing you. Even if something like that happens, and some letter is deleted due to lack of the proper addressing, you may see info of that message in LOG (Ctrl+Shift+A) and to inform the sender how to resend the message. If I wasn't clear enough, ask me. (-: - -- Mica PGP key uploaded at: http://pgp.mit.edu/ once just before breakfast :banana: [Earth LOG: 176 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux, and with Bochs 2.1.1 with a small DLX Linux; and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCHf3J9q62QPd3XuIRAmJnAJ9YuTorKIIVFUnUNh8/o8c1X9JOIACdEld+ xnIuIGf4jx2lmpK8YI4KBSk= =slgG -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
Mica, Thursday, February 24, 2005, 9:16:11 PM, you wrote: MM OK, actually you would have to train a bit your friends then, and to MM tell them (if they already do not do so) to use only (nick)names you use MM in your FROM and REPLY-TO fields. For some reason I was assuming it would be more complicated than it turned out to be. I guess that's because I usually read e-mail in the morning while drinking my first cups of coffee. It'll take my friends and others awhile to get used to using a particular address form, but I'll give it a try. MM This way you practically can filter everything using just Selective MM Download filters. In the beginning, I'll just filter those that don't pass to a junk folder I can check periodically. Some of my friends are slow learners. :-) -- Thanks, Rick Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Mon, 21 Feb 2005, @ @ at 08:20:20 +0500, when Richard H. Stoddard wrote: Mica, Monday, February 21, 2005, 12:41:17 AM, you wrote: MM Okay. Tell me first do you as well have your address on some of web MM sites of yours, and if you do, in what form you have it exposed there? MM Namely, what exactly mailto:; code/form you use? No, I don't have it on any public web sites. I don't have any mail to code. I have three addresses, but most of the spam comes to only one of them. Okay then, less problems to solve. Tell me, do you have some friends, or business partners who do not address you properly, namely not using your full name (or a screen/nick name defined by yourself) in TO (or CC) field, but using only the address of yours? If yes, we'll tighten/tweak them a bit. Let's work with this address you say most of spam is coming to (so we can see the results better, and quicker). - -- Mica PGP key uploaded at: http://pgp.mit.edu/ once just before breakfast :flagmica: [Earth LOG: 173 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux, and with Bochs 2.1.1 with a small DLX Linux; and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCGdaV9q62QPd3XuIRAufaAJ9SADNLQ6M+7uysL+r5KomTqoWnGgCfX8XP 9thZSNh0fQaS2+46cHgtEhM= =0SAv -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
Mica, Monday, February 21, 2005, 5:39:50 PM, you wrote: MM Okay then, less problems to solve. Tell me, do you have some friends, or MM business partners who do not address you properly, namely not using your MM full name (or a screen/nick name defined by yourself) in TO (or CC) MM field, but using only the address of yours? I assume I'm like most folks: I have my friends and others in my address book and flagged so they go to the known folder; I have white-listed mailing lists like TBUDL; but I do receive mail that is not spam from others who are not in my book but whom I know or were referred to me by friends. My friends use all sorts of nicknames for me, including only the address; I can try to train them, but will have to deal with the third on a case-by-case basis. -- Rick Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
Hello Mica, I'll try to say this in other way... When you make a party, you do not have to check entire city to know who is *not* invited, in order to decide who of them will be passed in in your beautiful house; you pass just those with invitations of yours. (-: The fine people who address you properly. If I come to your party without an invitation, would you let me in? ;-) -- Best regards, Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain) Using The Bat! v3.0.2.10 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sun, 20 Feb 2005, @ @ at 13:20:26 +0100, when MAU wrote: Hello Mica, I'll try to say this in other way... When you make a party, you do not have to check entire city to know who is *not* invited, in order to decide who of them will be passed in in your beautiful house; you pass just those with invitations of yours. (-: The fine people who address you properly. If I come to your party without an invitation, would you let me in? ;-) Pay noble attention: The fine people who address you properly. (-: This is the essential bit of the formula. We just have to define what is *properly*. In this case, what is in my from and/or reply-to field, is considered properly addressing. Everything arriving using such form of addressing will be considered, by default, as having invitation, and will be passed in. So, as to my part of job, it is up on me to define a form of addressing, and as to your part of job, it is up on you to use exactly this form of addressing. And then you are in and the party goes. (-: - -- Mica PGP key uploaded at: http://pgp.mit.edu/ once just before breakfast :happypiglet: [Earth LOG: 172 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux, and with Bochs 2.1.1 with a small DLX Linux; and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCGIw99q62QPd3XuIRAiYhAJ0ZZImpKE7ug0/nLarWve84bFmcLACbBlZt z+WM3z1NVW1QPl6QJwuew8s= =14VX -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
Hello Mica, So, as to my part of job, it is up on me to define a form of addressing, and as to your part of job, it is up on you to use exactly this form of addressing. And then you are in and the party goes. (-: OK, understood. Hope you have enough beer ;-) -- Best regards, Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain) Using The Bat! v3.0.2.10 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
Hello Mica Mijatovic everyone else, on 19-Feb-2005 at 23:28 you (Mica Mijatovic) wrote: Filter against what you *accept*/receive, not against what you do *not*. (-: Isn't that exactly what you do when you train a(ny) Bayes filter? I'll try to say this in other way... When you make a party, you do not have to check entire city to know who is *not* invited, in order to decide who of them will be passed in in your beautiful house; you pass just those with invitations of yours. (-: The fine people who address you properly. I make a party all the time with my emails :) and all kind of people (mails) come by. I classify the mails and tell them you may get in and you may not get in. I don't worry about the whole city (world email traffic) either, only about those people who get by and want to join the party (mails that are somehow addressed directly to me). Whats so charming is that my colleague the Bayes filter learns which mails I accept, and which not, so I don't have to worry myself. -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Each waking day is a stage dominated for good or ill, comedy, farce, or tragedy, by a dramatis personae, the `self, and so it will be until the curtain drops. -- Sir Charles Sherrington Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sun, 20 Feb 2005, @ @ at 18:23:42 +0100, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote: I make a party all the time with my emails :) and all kind of people (mails) come by. I classify the mails and tell them you may get in and you may not get in. I don't worry about the whole city (world email traffic) either, only about those people who get by and want to join the party (mails that are somehow addressed directly to me). Whats so charming is that my colleague the Bayes filter learns which mails I accept, and which not, so I don't have to worry myself. OK then, since I see you beam already enough pleasure, I guess it is not needed for me to lead you gently to the core of this beauty, unknown before, and to see your eyes admiring it. (-: - -- Mica PGP key uploaded at: http://pgp.mit.edu/ once just before breakfast :bearhug: [Earth LOG: 172 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux, and with Bochs 2.1.1 with a small DLX Linux; and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCGM769q62QPd3XuIRAhwNAJ98t/SlDQKqaMWmJ/FqETdcUJ8cWgCeNHH/ DKsm5Mi0k0JvJOfLXqe+1hM= =WJ1Q -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sun, 20 Feb 2005, @ @ at 18:10:01 +0100, when MAU wrote: Hello Mica, So, as to my part of job, it is up on me to define a form of addressing, and as to your part of job, it is up on you to use exactly this form of addressing. And then you are in and the party goes. (-: OK, understood. Hope you have enough beer ;-) The apple pie has gone, as the fate of the cow-juice was, but beer oh yes it's here, yet. (-: - -- Mica PGP key uploaded at: http://pgp.mit.edu/ once just before breakfast :crazy: [Earth LOG: 172 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux, and with Bochs 2.1.1 with a small DLX Linux; and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCGNBp9q62QPd3XuIRArkHAJ9k/JXJYSw60w5uwGbrs/nRIXuhsgCfbPAJ X7ZZbYUE1pPrBj9/VHi1iiY= =mak6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
Mica, Sunday, February 20, 2005, 3:28:46 AM, you wrote: MM Will be my pleasure to lead you gently to the core of this beauty, MM unknown before, and to see your eyes admiring it. (-: I'm prepared to go that route, but how do I do it? I already have a number of addresses white-listed (such as TBUDL), and of course I have my known filter. How do I send the rest to a junk folder? -- Thanks, Rick Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sun, 20 Feb 2005, @ @ at 07:34:51 +0500, when Richard H. Stoddard wrote: Mica, Sunday, February 20, 2005, 3:28:46 AM, you wrote: MM Will be my pleasure to lead you gently to the core of this beauty, MM unknown before, and to see your eyes admiring it. (-: I'm prepared to go that route, but how do I do it? I already have a number of addresses white-listed (such as TBUDL), and of course I have my known filter. How do I send the rest to a junk folder? Okay. Tell me first do you as well have your address on some of web sites of yours, and if you do, in what form you have it exposed there? Namely, what exactly mailto:; code/form you use? - -- Mica PGP key uploaded at: http://pgp.mit.edu/ once just before breakfast :eyes: [Earth LOG: 172 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux, and with Bochs 2.1.1 with a small DLX Linux; and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCGOfc9q62QPd3XuIRAh8dAKCQSW0hCGUgXxgiqHhPK+7g3UPvDwCfeorW OJORfxtcy7mB8JcgBVID2OY= =gIPw -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
Mica, Monday, February 21, 2005, 12:41:17 AM, you wrote: MM Okay. Tell me first do you as well have your address on some of web MM sites of yours, and if you do, in what form you have it exposed there? MM Namely, what exactly mailto:; code/form you use? No, I don't have it on any public web sites. I don't have any mail to code. I have three addresses, but most of the spam comes to only one of them. -- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Just few thoughts about anti-spam strategy, before I forget it... Cringely, Info World http://www.infoworld.com: BEGINNING Filter This: Spam may be annoying, but spam filters may prove a bigger problem. Dozens of readers have contributed terms to the list of things that make anti-spam software freak out. My faves: b*tt welds (mechanical engineering), sn*tch block (construction equipment), and bifurcated hermaphroditic pins (electrical connectors). (Forgive the asterisks -- I'm afraid this column itself might get filtered.) One Cringester says he can't get e-mails containing the word special*st because cial*s is embedded inside it. Finally, a Cringe informant who works for a major credit card company says that in his industry, multinational banks are commonly referred to as l*rge m*mbers. As I've always suspected, size does count -- at least when it comes to bank accounts. END(E) My formula is like this: ~~~ | Filter against what you *accept*/receive, | | not against what you do *not*. (-: | ~~~ But it seems that such a strategy is still a bit ahead of the time. No problem, let this document be a historical piquancy then, or simply a recipe for those ready for an anti-spam adventure. PS - I am not sure if it's wise to say this formula publicly... I am simply hesitating whether to enjoy it myself (and keep my mouth shut), or to help (wo)Mankind too. - -- Mica (today, he's an Anti Spam Dandy) PGP key uploaded at: http://pgp.mit.edu/ once just before breakfast o [Earth LOG: 171 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux, and with Bochs 2.1.1 with a small DLX Linux; and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCF3DY9q62QPd3XuIRAsp0AJ49yoAwQLjtUKDDwkiSbwPYevk+QgCggN7J naWb7O8cfl0Ncjxrs8f09YQ= =wUkJ -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
Hello Mica Mijatovic everyone else, on 19-Feb-2005 at 18:01 you (Mica Mijatovic) wrote: Filter against what you *accept*/receive, not against what you do *not*. (-: Isn't that exactly what you do when you train a(ny) Bayes filter? -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) When you say you agree on a thing in principle, you mean you have not the slightest intention of carrying it out in practice. -- Otto von Bismarck Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Again, why only TB built-in filters are enough to fight all sorts of SPAM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sat, 19 Feb 2005, @ @ at 20:11:40 +0100, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote: Hello Mica Mijatovic everyone else, on 19-Feb-2005 at 18:01 you (Mica Mijatovic) wrote: Filter against what you *accept*/receive, not against what you do *not*. (-: Isn't that exactly what you do when you train a(ny) Bayes filter? I'll try to say this in other way... When you make a party, you do not have to check entire city to know who is *not* invited, in order to decide who of them will be passed in in your beautiful house; you pass just those with invitations of yours. (-: The fine people who address you properly. If I still wasn't clear enough, you may ask me again. (: Will be my pleasure to lead you gently to the core of this beauty, unknown before, and to see your eyes admiring it. (-: - -- Mica PGP key uploaded at: http://pgp.mit.edu/ once just before breakfast :banana: [Earth LOG: 171 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux, and with Bochs 2.1.1 with a small DLX Linux; and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCF72d9q62QPd3XuIRAheIAJ0cAG4/KQwb0fNARfIBb1Rm3lY/PQCfaE2h 93Il9FCOT48ihU1M9xTKcZo= =9t+6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
