%CURSOR (was: Re: [SPAM?] Re: v10 beta 8)
Hello Ira, Tuesday, April 19, 2022, 9:14:18 AM, you wrote: >> Using %CURSOR now, no difference. Why? > I noticed in my instance that 2 different accounts replies worked different, > one had $Cursor and was broken, and the other had $CURSOR and worked. > Changing the mixed case one to upper case got rid of the weird font issue. > Maybe it was something else but here's my reply format, see if it works for > you it's all formatted as 12pt Arial HTML. > > > Hello %OFromFName, > %ODateEn, %OTimeLongEn, you wrote: > %QUOTES > %CURSOR > -- Me > This is not a beta issue, so we should discuss on TBUDL instead. The template macros are not case-sensitive. I believe that you inadvertedly used "$" instead of "%" in the template that didn't work, as you did in your reply just now. Could you check that? -- Cheers, Thomas. Message reply created with The Bat! Version 9.5.1 (64-bit) under Windows 10.0 Build 19043 Current version is 9.1.18 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: move message to spam folder
Hi On Tuesday 14 April 2020 at 10:37:58 AM, in , ml-respo...@treadstone79.de wrote:- > Hi, > is there a way to manually move a message to the spam > folder using a > quick button? You could do something with Deletion and Alternative Deletion settings in Account Properties. Or you could probably do it with a common filter that's only executed by pressing a hotkey combination. > (The > button "Mark as Junk" > can't be used without a plugin.) (You could perhaps find a suitable plugin to install.) > Ideally, this function should choose the spam folder > of the correct > account as well: If using a filter, the filter action would be something like Move to the folder ..\Spam -- Best regards MFPA <mailto:2017-r3sgs86x8e-lists-gro...@riseup.net> Something must be done. This is something. Therefore, we must do it. Using The Bat! Version 8.8.2.5 (BETA) (64-bit) on Windows 10.0 Build 18362 Current version is 8.0.18 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
move message to spam folder
Hi, is there a way to manually move a message to the spam folder using a quick button? I can only think of either manually dragging the message from inbox to spam folder or using the "move to folder" button, but the former is difficult if you have a larger folder list and the latter requires to select the spam folder manually each time. (The button "Mark as Junk" can't be used without a plugin.) Ideally, this function should choose the spam folder of the correct account as well: I'm using a virtual folder to build a common inbox for a number of accounts. When I click on this hypothetical new button I'd like to go the mail to the spam folder defined for the account this mail has been received by. Is this already possible somehow, or could this be a feature for a future version of TheBat? -- MfG, Alto Speckhardt mailto: Current version is 8.0.18 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Best spam filter for TB!
11/28/2016 1:56 PM Hi Arkadiusz, On 11/28/2016 Arkadiusz Gawlik wrote: AG> Hello Jack, AG> On Monday, November 28, 2016 at 5:35:21 PM, you wrote in subject of "Best spam filter for TB!": JSL>> Anyway, the long and short of this message is a request to learn what this group JSL>> thinks is a good spam filter for TB! today. We are both running v6.xx and JSL>> Windows 10. AG> I am using AntispamSniper for TheBat! (a paid version). AG> I've used it on Windows XP, Windows 7, Windows 8 and now Windows 10 AG> and various TB! versions without any issues. I agree. Been using it for years. It just works. - -- Paul The Bat! v.7.3.12.8 (BETA) on Windows 7 Pro 64 bit 6.1.7600 No IMAP No OTFE Current version is 7.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Best spam filter for TB!
Hello Jack, On Monday, November 28, 2016 at 5:35:21 PM, you wrote in subject of "Best spam filter for TB!": JSL> Anyway, the long and short of this message is a request to learn what this group JSL> thinks is a good spam filter for TB! today. We are both running v6.xx and JSL> Windows 10. I am using AntispamSniper for TheBat! (a paid version). I've used it on Windows XP, Windows 7, Windows 8 and now Windows 10 and various TB! versions without any issues. -- Best regards, Arek Current version is 7.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Best spam filter for TB!
Hello TBUDL'ers, My wife is getting annoyed at the amount of spam (advertisements) she is getting and wants me to do something about it. Years ago I was using K9 which seemed to work just fine but then I discovered it also seemed to be preventing large emails from getting through, so I un-installed it. As it turns out it was a combination of K9 and TB's file size restrictions which were unknown to me at the time. K9 is still out there but either Win 10 or Firefox now thinks it is malware and warns me when I go to download it. I believe Win 10 and Firefox are being just a little too cautious about it since K9 hasn't been upgraded in years and never acted like malware in the past. Anyway, the long and short of this message is a request to learn what this group thinks is a good spam filter for TB! today. We are both running v6.xx and Windows 10. Much thanks for any advice. -- TIA, Jack LaRosa :usflag: :alabamaflag: Central Alabama Using TB! 6.0.12 OS: Safely back to Windows, --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus Current version is 7.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Spam Sniper removal
Hello Paul, On Tuesday, March 22, 2016 you wrote: PB> You might try http://www.snapfiles.com/get/revouninstaller.html Thanks Paul. Been using REVO Uninstaller for years. -- Regards, Jack Using TB! ver 6.0.12 with Windows 7 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus Current version is 7.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Spam Sniper removal
Hello TBUDL@thebat., Wednesday, March 23, 2016, 1:38:00 AM, you wrote: JSL> Hello Feli, JSL> On Tuesday, March 22, 2016 you wrote: FW>> Hello Jack, FW>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 11:54:56 -0500GMT Jack S. LaRosa wrote: JSL>>> Ok, now that I've tried A.S.S. and don't wish to purchase it at this time (maybe JSL>>> later), anybody know how to remove it so I don't have to keep seeing those nag JSL>>> boxes every time I start TB!? FW>> If you are happy with the functionality why not switch to the free FW>> version? (It's in the middle of the download page). I've been using FW>> it for years before I decided to pay for this excellent work. JSL> Well, before I started getting nag messages telling me my 30 day trial was up, I JSL> thought I *was* using the free version. JSL> Mistakes were made, tears were shed. I'll go back and take another look Feli but JSL> for those 30 days I don't think I even saw any spam. I'm assuming if A.S.S. had trapped JSL> any spam I would have been given the option to handle it so maybe I just didn't JSL> get any spam during that 30 days. JSL> Anyway, thanks again for your help. You might try http://www.snapfiles.com/get/revouninstaller.html -- Paul - Using The Bat! v7.1.6.0 (Christmas Edition) on Windows 7 6.1 Build 7601 Service Pack 1 ...My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right. Current version is 7.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Spam Sniper removal
Hello Feli, On Tuesday, March 22, 2016 you wrote: FW> Hello Jack, FW> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 11:54:56 -0500GMT Jack S. LaRosa wrote: JSL>> Ok, now that I've tried A.S.S. and don't wish to purchase it at this time (maybe JSL>> later), anybody know how to remove it so I don't have to keep seeing those nag JSL>> boxes every time I start TB!? FW> If you are happy with the functionality why not switch to the free FW> version? (It's in the middle of the download page). I've been using FW> it for years before I decided to pay for this excellent work. Well, before I started getting nag messages telling me my 30 day trial was up, I thought I *was* using the free version. Mistakes were made, tears were shed. I'll go back and take another look Feli but for those 30 days I don't think I even saw any spam. I'm assuming if A.S.S. had trapped any spam I would have been given the option to handle it so maybe I just didn't get any spam during that 30 days. Anyway, thanks again for your help. -- Regards, Jack Using TB! ver 6.0.12 with Windows 7 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus Current version is 7.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Spam Sniper removal
Hello Jack, On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 11:54:56 -0500GMT Jack S. LaRosa wrote: JSL> Ok, now that I've tried A.S.S. and don't wish to purchase it at this time (maybe JSL> later), anybody know how to remove it so I don't have to keep seeing those nag JSL> boxes every time I start TB!? If you are happy with the functionality why not switch to the free version? (It's in the middle of the download page). I've been using it for years before I decided to pay for this excellent work. -- Regards, Feli The Bat! Version 7.1.18.2 (BETA) (64-bit) on Windows 10.0 Build 10586 Jedes Ding hat drei Seiten: Meine, Deine und die richtige (also doch meine) Current version is 7.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Spam Sniper removal
Hello Stuart, On Monday, March 21, 2016 you wrote: S> Hello Jack, S> Monday, March 21, 2016, 11:54:56 AM, you wrote: >> Ok, now that I've tried A.S.S. and don't wish to purchase it at this time >> (maybe >> later), anybody know how to remove it so I don't have to keep seeing those >> nag >> boxes every time I start TB!? S> Options/Preferences/Plug Ins/Anti-Spam and Delete. (blushing_shy) Thank you Stuart. Worked perfectly. -- Regards, Jack Using TB! ver 6.0.12 with Windows 7 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus Current version is 7.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Spam Sniper removal
Hello Jack, Monday, March 21, 2016, 11:54:56 AM, you wrote: > Ok, now that I've tried A.S.S. and don't wish to purchase it at this time > (maybe > later), anybody know how to remove it so I don't have to keep seeing those nag > boxes every time I start TB!? Options/Preferences/Plug Ins/Anti-Spam and Delete. (blushing_shy) -- Best regards, Stuartmailto:skcu...@fastmail.fm Current version is 7.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Anti Spam Sniper removal
Hello TBUDL'ers, Ok, now that I've tried A.S.S. and don't wish to purchase it at this time (maybe later), anybody know how to remove it so I don't have to keep seeing those nag boxes every time I start TB!? -- TIA, Jack LaRosa :usflag: :alabamaflag: Central Alabama Using TB! 6.0.12 OS: Safely back to Windows 7, Service Pack 1 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus Current version is 7.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-spam spider
On Wednesday, November 20, 2013, 10:12:21 PM, you (tbudl@thebat.dutaint.com) wrote: > Antispam SNIPER? If that is the case open it up from the toolbar, go > to options and clear the database and let it start learning again So I did that. Two new e-mail messages from the same list about which I wrote earlier, appeared today in junk. Maybe that is an improvement , but it is unnecessary and annoying. Leonard -- Leonard S. Berkowitz Using The Bat! v5.2.2 on Windows 7 6.1 Build 7601 Service Pack 1 Current version is 5.2.2 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-spam spider
LSB> The other day I wrote that Anti-spam Spider seemed to be stricter. It LSB> has gotten worse. Several e-mail nottes from another list were junked, LSB> even though I had put the sender into my address book. LSB> Any ideas? LSB> Thanks. Antispam SNIPER? If that is the case open it up from the toolbar, go to options and clear the database and let it start learning again -- Rick "Corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed." Abraham Lincoln v6.0.4.1 on Windows 6.2 Build 9200 Current version is 5.2.2 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Anti-spam spider
The other day I wrote that Anti-spam Spider seemed to be stricter. It has gotten worse. Several e-mail nottes from another list were junked, even though I had put the sender into my address book. Any ideas? Thanks. -- Leonard S. Berkowitz Using The Bat! v5.2.2 on Windows 7 6.1 Build 7601 Service Pack 1 Current version is 5.2.2 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Anti-spam spider
Has Anti-spam spider become stricter. I am finding an increase of the number of e-mail notes that end up in the junk folder, many from regular correspondents of mine. This morning, I found seven (7) e-mail messages from this list in the junk folder. Thanks. -- Leonard S. Berkowitz Using The Bat! v5.2.2 on Windows 7 6.1 Build 7601 Service Pack 1 Current version is 5.2.2 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam Catchers
Hello MFPA, On Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:17:06 +0100 GMT (02-Oct-13, 02:17 +0700 GMT), MFPA wrote: >> It's been done server-side over here. > Just out of interest, do you run your own server or is your incoming > email censored by your service provider? Private email: I use GMX and they send me daily spam reports. A Basian filtering system allows for training, if there should be any false-positives or false-negatives (hardly ever happens). Company email: The email provider we contract this out to uses some kind of spam filter, but we get a lot of false-negatives and a few false positives, so I have to do some manual work, preferrably on a daily basis. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 5.8 under Windows 7 6.1 Build 7601 Service Pack 1 Current version is 5.2.2 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam Catchers
Hi On Sunday 29 September 2013 at 2:25:37 PM, in , Thomas Fernandez wrote: > It's been done server-side over here. Just out of interest, do you run your own server or is your incoming email censored by your service provider? -- Best regards MFPAmailto:expires2...@ymail.com If you can't convince them, confuse them. Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 5.2.2 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam Catchers
Hello David, On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 15:47:52 +0100 GMT (27-Sep-13, 21:47 +0700 GMT), David Elliott wrote: > What do you all use to catch SPAM? It's been done server-side over here. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 5.8 under Windows 7 6.1 Build 7601 Service Pack 1 Current version is 5.2.2 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Spam Catchers
9/27/2013 10:56 AM Hi jb, On 9/27/2013 jb_lists...@trink.co.uk wrote: jtcu> Hello David Elliott, jtcu> On Friday, September 27, 2013, 3:47:52 PM, David Elliott wrote: >> What do you all use to catch SPAM? jtcu> AntiSpamSniper - http://www.antispamsniper.com jtcu> I have been using it for years. Ditto - -- Paul The Bat! v.4.2.44.2 on Windows 7 Pro 64 bit 6.1.7601 No IMAP No OTFE Current version is 5.2.2 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam Catchers
Hello David Elliott, On Friday, September 27, 2013, 3:47:52 PM, David Elliott wrote: > What do you all use to catch SPAM? AntiSpamSniper - http://www.antispamsniper.com I have been using it for years. -- Julian Using The Bat! v5.4.8 on Windows 7 6.1 Build 7600 Current version is 5.2.2 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Spam Catchers
Hello Tbudl, What do you all use to catch SPAM? -- Best regards, David mailto:da...@elliott.uk.com Current version is 5.2.2 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: SPAM Filter
Jeff, If the TB4 plug-ins are compatible with TB5, you might want to take a look at the Regula Anti-spam plug-in. I've been using it ever since my mail server went to STARTLS (which broke POPfile) about six months ago. After a bit of training Regula seems to be doing a good job of catching the spam that gets through the mail server's filters. http://www.gaijin.at/en/tbpregula.php -- Steven Vallière | tb 4.2.44.2 | mailto:the...@e-visions.com -- "If you didn't write it down, then it didn't happen." -Larry Zana Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: SPAM Filter
Hello Jeff, On Wednesday, February 29, 2012 you wrote: JG> Hello Group JG> I've been away from Windows for a while but I'm now back home with XP JG> x64 and TheBat v 5.0.34. JG> I see we no longer have the BayesIT (? spelling) plug in for a variety JG> of reasons. JG> What do people use/recommend in its place? It's useful to be able to JG> identify SPAM and have it moved to a junk folder. Years ago a similar question was asked and the suggestion at that time was K9 from KEIR.NET which I have used ever since with great success. It's a Bayesian (sp?) filter which will tag spam with the word SPAM in the subject line. From there you can create a filter to move it to another folder. -- Jack LaRosa Using The Bat! ver: 4.2.44.2. Running Windows XP Pro ver 5 build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
SPAM Filter
Hello Group I've been away from Windows for a while but I'm now back home with XP x64 and TheBat v 5.0.34. I see we no longer have the BayesIT (? spelling) plug in for a variety of reasons. What do people use/recommend in its place? It's useful to be able to identify SPAM and have it moved to a junk folder. -- Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-spam add-on
On Thursday, August 25, 2011, 4:55:33 PM, you (tbudl@thebat.dutaint.com) wrote: > I don't know whether AntiSpamSniper is the best but it is working here > quite sufficiently. You can get it from > http://antispamsniper.com/thebat_plugin.html Thanks. Leonard -- Leonard S. Berkowitz Using The Bat! v5.0.20.1 on Windows 7 6.1 Build 7601 Service Pack 1 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-spam add-on
On Thursday, August 25, 2011, 4:56:57 PM, you (tbudl@thebat.dutaint.com) wrote: > I use it too > http://antispamsniper.com/index.html Thanks. Leonard -- Leonard S. Berkowitz Using The Bat! v5.0.20.1 on Windows 7 6.1 Build 7601 Service Pack 1 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-spam add-on
Hello Leonard, Thursday, August 25, 2011, 10:31:16 PM, you wrote: > I'd like to know whether AntiSpam Spider is still the > latest and greatest anti-spam utility for theBat on a Windows 7/64 bit > machine, and, if so, how do I get it. If something else has superseded > it, what? and how do I get that? Thanks. I don't know whether AntiSpamSniper is the best but it is working here quite sufficiently. You can get it from http://antispamsniper.com/thebat_plugin.html -- Regards, Uwe Using The Bat! v5.0.22.11 (ALPHA) on Windows 7 6.1 Build 7601 Service Pack 1 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-spam add-on
> A few years back, I installed an anti-spam add-on, AntiSpam Sniper > from Good Vein Software. I have installed theBat on a new computer and > restored the backup there. The anti-spam utility does not appear in my > anti-spam preferences, so I guess I need to reinstall it or install > something else. I'd like to know whether AntiSpam Spider is still the > latest and greatest anti-spam utility for theBat on a Windows 7/64 bit > machine, and, if so, how do I get it. If something else has superseded > it, what? and how do I get that? Thanks. I use it too http://antispamsniper.com/index.html -- Rick Dear Boyfriend, I can make your girlfriend scream louder than you can. Sincerely, Spiders v5.0.22.11 (ALPHA) on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Anti-spam add-on
A few years back, I installed an anti-spam add-on, AntiSpam Sniper from Good Vein Software. I have installed theBat on a new computer and restored the backup there. The anti-spam utility does not appear in my anti-spam preferences, so I guess I need to reinstall it or install something else. I'd like to know whether AntiSpam Spider is still the latest and greatest anti-spam utility for theBat on a Windows 7/64 bit machine, and, if so, how do I get it. If something else has superseded it, what? and how do I get that? Thanks. -- Leonard S. Berkowitz Reply to leonard.s.berkowitz@alumni.upenn.edu Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Gmail SPAM Plugin
Hello All Just wondering if there is a "Report SPAM" plugin that works with Gmail? I've notice a SPAM starting to come through and would like a way to report it in The Bat! Cheers -- Scott Sims Email: sc...@aceblue.com Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam
Sunday, May 23, 2010, 12:45:34 AM, you wrote: > And, presumably, no way to rescue messages falsely categorised as > spam. Actually, there is. All marked messages are collected in the Junk folder, which you can review either on the web interface or via IMAP. Zoltan smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam
Hello tb...@thebat., Saturday, May 22, 2010, 1:14:42 PM, you wrote: TH> Hello TBUL, TH> Just curious but how do you all deal with Spam? Do you have a TH> favorite spam filter that you use with TB. I haven't been able to TH> find anything that has worked that well with TB to control Spam. TH> Thanks in advance for your input!!! A lot of great ideas have come in. If you prefer to use the built-in mail filtering in Sorting Office: You put in all the positive filters to move the mail you want to accept to particular folders. Then you put in a last filter to dispose of spam that reaches you but was not addressed specifically to you. Sequence is important Account – Sorting Office/Filters Incoming Mail The Bat Header contains TBUDL Or Header contains tbudl Or Header contains thebat.dutaint.com Action: Move to folder …TheBat SpamHeader contains mpx.com Or Sender contains http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam
Hello MFPA, On Sat, 22 May 2010 23:45:34 +0100 GMT (23/May/10, 5:45 AM +0700 GMT), MFPA wrote: >> Server-side is better anyway: No need to download all the spam >> messages. M> And, presumably, no way to rescue messages falsely categorised as M> spam. You presume wrong. I get a daily list of mails that where classified as spam, and a link in each mail which I can click on and "mark the message as not spam". In addition, I can look at the spam folder any time I like and de-spam a message. I would look there if I am expecting a message and haven't received it yet. In most cases, the list of spam messages in the morning is sufficient. The spam clasification is based on Bayesian filters, so it learns. I can also explicitely white-list or black-list email address. So, I have all the comfort a client-side spam solution offers, with the difference that I don't need to download the messages first. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.33.9 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam
Hello Ian, Saturday, May 22, 2010, 4:17:51 PM, you wrote: > G'day MFPA, > On Sunday, May 23, 2010, at 8:45:34 AM, you (MFPA) wrote: >>> Server-side is better anyway: No need to download all >>> the spam messages. M>> And, presumably, no way to rescue messages falsely categorised as M>> spam. > It is a major disadvantage of server-side spam filtering and why I > have disabled this with my ISP. > The big advantage of Mailwasher is that you get to see a list of the > messages available and you can preview them if you like. It is you who > then decides whether to download the entire message. If you do > inadvertently delete a legitimate message, you do have a recycle bin > where you can recover all or part of the message. If you cannot > recover the message body, you can at least contact the sender and ask > it be sent again. > I am not in favour of ANY system that classifies the messages and acts > on its own. I am currently in dispute with a client owing several > thousands of dollars. He uses Norton 360, and essentially you cannot > send him any e-mail that has a dollar sign in it, or refers to the > word dollar or any other terms that are part of an invoice. Norton 360 > automatically deletes them and he does not want to change any settings > because he wants it to work that way. Basically this way he claims he > never received anything. > Unfortunately, experience has shown that systems that automatically > classify mail and then download and file them away in a spam or junk > folder without any user intervention see the user rarely (if ever) > checking the spam or junk folder which is then automatically purged. > That being the case such systems are as bad as server-side filtering. > The user needs to be in control, and even then there needs to be some > capability of recovery. WOW!!! Thanks for everyone's input, this was all good info...!!! -- Best regards, Timmailto:timh...@cox.net Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam
Hi On Saturday 22 May 2010 at 5:16:23 PM, in , Thomas Fernandez wrote: > Server-side is better anyway: No need to download all > the spam messages. And, presumably, no way to rescue messages falsely categorised as spam. -- Best regards MFPAmailto:expires2...@ymail.com Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals. Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam
>> Just curious but how do you all deal with Spam? Do you have a >> favorite spam filter that you use with TB. I haven't been able to >> find anything that has worked that well with TB to control Spam. >> Thanks in advance for your input!!! SpamAssassin does the job on my server. A while, the greylisting was active, which detected all spam, but also too many mails didn't came through who were 'good' for me. It costs me too much time to add each of them to the whitelist there, so I deactivated the greylisting and the SPAM which is not detected by SpamAssassin is processed locally.. Many years I used for that the very good antispamsniper for The Bat! (registered), but since I installed the New PCTools Internet security, I use that also as spamprocessor, because it conflicted with Antispamsniper. Regards, Gunivortus E-mail message checked by Internet Security (7.0.0.508) Database version: 6.15050 http://www.pctools.com/en/internet-security/ Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam
> Hello TBUL, > Just curious but how do you all deal with Spam? Do you have a > favorite spam filter that you use with TB. I haven't been able to > find anything that has worked that well with TB to control Spam. > Thanks in advance for your input!!! I use "Spam Assassin" on the server and only the AntispamSniper plugin. However I also have an account at Spamcop.net and report the S.O.B.s as fast as they come in. After a while the flow slows to a dribble - I get 1-3 a day these days If you use Mailwasher, they have a built in report-to-spamcop feature if you have an account If reporting sounds like a lot of time, just remember that you are going to spend time on spam one way or the other. You might as well cost the spammers some money as they get their accounts closed -- Rick Never go to bed mad. Stay up and fight. - Phyllis Diller v4.2.36.4 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam
Hello Hajdú, On Sat, 22 May 2010 14:17:32 +0200 GMT (22/May/10, 19:17 PM +0700 GMT), Hajdú Zoltán wrote: >> Just curious but how do you all deal with Spam? HZ> I use Fastmail.fm and they do very good spam filtering on the HZ> server. Same here, except I don't use fastmail.fm but gmx.net. No need for any spam filtering on my computer. Server-side is better anyway: No need to download all the spam messages. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.33.9 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam
Hello Tim, Friday, May 21, 2010, 8:14:42 PM, you wrote: Tim> Hello TBUL, Tim> Just curious but how do you all deal with Spam? Do you have a Tim> favorite spam filter that you use with TB. I haven't been able to Tim> find anything that has worked that well with TB to control Spam. Tim> Thanks in advance for your input!!! I use Antispam Marisuite for The Bat! v1.7.2 At the start it missed about 30/100, and did a false pos on 15/100. After a week or so, of teaching Antispam Marisuite which is what and what is which, it has only messed up 2 times, marking the e-mail spam, when it was not and missed 1 spam and did not catch it. I have about 50 to 60 e-mails a day and I check the Junk Folder every couple of days, just to make sure. The BEST part of Antispam Marisuite for The Bat! is it integrates in to The Bat!, after using Outlook Express for years and trying to find a good spam program.. -- Best regards, Chasonekmailto:chaso...@hughes.net All Mail Virus Checked on it's way out, AND Virus Checked And Spam Checked on it's way in. Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Spam
Fellow list members, Am I the only one still using K9? -- TIA, Jack LaRosa mailto:jlar...@charter.net Sticking with with The Bat! ver: 4.0.38 for now. Operating? with Windows XP Pro ver 5 build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam
Saturday, May 22, 2010, 5:14:42 AM, you wrote: > Just curious but how do you all deal with Spam? Do you have a > favorite spam filter that you use with TB. I haven't been able to > find anything that has worked that well with TB to control Spam. > Thanks in advance for your input!!! I use Fastmail.fm and they do very good spam filtering on the server. Before that I used the antispam engine in my G Data Total Care Security Suite, that worked also very well. Zoltan smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam
Hi On Saturday 22 May 2010 at 4:14:42 AM, in , Tim Hamm wrote: > Hello TBUL, > Just curious but how do you all deal with Spam? Do > you have a favorite spam filter that you use with TB. > I haven't been able to find anything that has worked > that well with TB to control Spam. Thanks in advance > for your input!!! I find that being careful when giving out my email address and using different addresses for different purposes keeps it to a minimum. For example, the address I use for newsgroups and mailing lists is a yahoo address that I change every year; in six years I have only once needed to ditch the address after a shorter time due to spam, four years ago. Websites that require registration with an email address get disposable or spamgourmet addresses. Companies I deal with by email get either a spamgourmet address or an address of the form companyn...@mydomain. Out of 200-300 emails most days, usually spam messages are in single figures. Every couple of years or so, I suddenly start getting lots of spam messages, but this has always stopped just as suddenly after about 1500 messages spread over 7-10 days. It's so infrequent and short-lived that it doesn't become a problem; if it became a problem, turning off the catch-all email forwarding on my two domain names would stop it. -- Best regards MFPAmailto:expires2...@ymail.com The second mouse gets the cheese Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam
Tim, On 22-05-2010 05:14, you wrote in : > Just curious but how do you all deal with Spam? Spam Assassin on the mail server. :-) -- Best regards Peter Fjelsten 4.0.39.33 (BETA) Pro MyGate, AVG 12 IMAP (Courier) & 1 IMAP (Exchange 6.5), 1 POP3 MyGate, 300K+ msgs. Windows Vista 6.0 Build 6002 Service Pack 2 Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam
On Fri, 21 May 2010 at 20:14:42 -0700,Tim wrote: > Just curious but how do you all deal with Spam? Do you have a > favorite spam filter that you use with TB. I haven't been able to > find anything that has worked that well with TB to control Spam. > Thanks in advance for your input!!! I use a combination of Popfile and the free version of AntispamSniper for TB. I use Popfile to categorise into a total of 8 different work and personal categories as well as spam. There have been 3,000 messages classified as spam, and in that time there have been 34 false positives (classified as spam when they are not) and 154 false negatives (classified as not spam when they are). AntispamSniper has classified 5860 messages as spam since Feb 2006 with 116 false positives and, in that time, missed 961 (i.e. false negatives). So Popfile is significantly more accurate, even when it has to choose between 9 different categories for the messages. 7.7% of messages end up categorised as spam, which is the 4th largest classification. -- Robin Using The Bat! v4.2.36.4 Windows Vista 6.0 Build 6002 Service Pack 2 Popfile v1.1.1 Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Spam
Hello TBUL, Just curious but how do you all deal with Spam? Do you have a favorite spam filter that you use with TB. I haven't been able to find anything that has worked that well with TB to control Spam. Thanks in advance for your input!!! -- Best regards, Tim mailto:timh...@cox.net Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions [now OT]
Hi On Monday 27 July 2009 at 9:59:48 AM, in , Simon wrote: > I have absolutely no argument there. I completely agree > that 'a workman is worthy of his hire', to steal from > an old religious book. People are criminally > undervalued, vastly overworked, and grossly underpaid, > that's how capitalism works. Only by a narrow model of capitalism driven solely by naked greed. What about the early capitalist philanthropists who provided homes and welfare for their employees? This is often no longer possible thanks to the reprehensible invention called a plc, where the profits are distributed among shareholders who do absolutely nothing to deserve having the wealth siphoned from the communities that created it into their fat, deep pockets. > [...] I don't believe that > it inevitably leads to nobody valuing what anybody > does, rather it makes those with less money in their > pockets fight much harder to get the services and > 'things' cheaper, so that they can afford them. Which drives still more people to be paid far below the worth of their efforts and adds to the momentum of the downward spiral. > I heard someone say that if there weren't poor people > then the world would be a better place. The person > saying it was a businessman running a factory with over > 300 workers who had just gone on strike because of work > conditions and low wage complaints. You're either on > one side or the other in this world! I would guess he was more the greedy, selfish type rather than any sort of philanthropist. (-; -- Best regards, MFPA Was time invented by an Irishman named O'Clock? Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Simon, On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 00:33:18 +0100 GMT (28/Jul/09, 6:33 AM +0700 GMT), Simon wrote: >> Hello <...snip long stuff...> free? S> Just so there is no unnecessary hostility poking through here, whatever S> position you are defending I am not on the other side of it threatening it S> in any way, so you may want to relax on the adversarial stuff. Great, thanks for making that clear. S> And just in case it needs to be made clear, I am not an advocate of theft, S> crime, stealing software, or any other such activities. Neither would I S> suggest that people take want they want when they want it. And I haven't S> proposed that everything in the world should be free for everyone, although S> you seem to inferring that I have. For whatever reason you maybe just S> misunderstanding, or maybe I am. It matters not, because I don't advocate a S> 'free for all' anything...or slavery :-/ OK. This is clear now. :-) S> My home PC has a mixture of commercial and freeware and Open Source software S> on itif it isn't free or within my budget it doesn't get installed. This exactly was my point. We seem to be thinking the same way after all. S> For example, I purchased TB! right back near the 'beginning' and S> continue to pay for upgrades. I do the same for a number of other S> pieces of software as well. But if all the other software I S> currently use was commercial software then I would never be able to S> afford to use much of anythingand this would severely limit S> what I use the computer for. I see what you mean. There is some softeware on my computer for which I didn't pay the upgrade fee any more - and stick with the "old" version. S> I purchased WinRAR when I had DOS and WFWG 3.11 and the licence I purchased S> way back then has licensed me for all versions since that time. A number of S> software authors use this model.Rarlab still exists, and release regular S> updates. And without me paying, paying again, and paying again, and again... I have the same with Total Commander. However, when I purchased the new office computer for the new company a year ago, I bought new licences rather than moving the old ones. I could have, but I thought they are doing a good job. S> Commercial software authors are just like everyone else, vying for a portion S> of the pie, a slice of the limited and finite resources that people have S> available to them. They are selling a product and hope to convince people S> that it is worth paying our for...often over and over again. The simple fact S> is that only a few will be able to make a decent living from this practice, S> not the many...and those that believe that they deserve to make a living S> just because they are creating something are misguided, and haven't worked S> out that it is other people value their product, not them. If you get that S> wrong, then you don't get paidand you'll need to look for another way to S> make money. I agree with this. That is why it is important for software developers who make a living of it to produce software that people are willing to pay for. The competition is ever-improving, you have to keep step ahead. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.9 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Roger Phillips: > Monday, July 27, 2009, 7:05:25 PM, among other things, you wrote: > > L> Unfortunately, my version of the Sniper (3.2.1.1 free) hangs when I try to > L> access the white list configuration. ... > Did you start with 3.2.1.1 or did you upgrade from an earlier version? I upgraded, but thanx: I finally got to grab the lost dialog using alt+spacebar,move, it was way way out of the screen. So, I'm going to test the white list feature, finally. -- Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at linuxfan.it Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
'Ello Thomas, On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:44:29 +0700 (your time) you said: > Hello <...snip long stuff...> free? Just so there is no unnecessary hostility poking through here, whatever position you are defending I am not on the other side of it threatening it in any way, so you may want to relax on the adversarial stuff. And just in case it needs to be made clear, I am not an advocate of theft, crime, stealing software, or any other such activities. Neither would I suggest that people take want they want when they want it. And I haven't proposed that everything in the world should be free for everyone, although you seem to inferring that I have. For whatever reason you maybe just misunderstanding, or maybe I am. It matters not, because I don't advocate a 'free for all' anything...or slavery :-/ My home PC has a mixture of commercial and freeware and Open Source software on itif it isn't free or within my budget it doesn't get installed. For example, I purchased TB! right back near the 'beginning' and continue to pay for upgrades. I do the same for a number of other pieces of software as well. But if all the other software I currently use was commercial software then I would never be able to afford to use much of anythingand this would severely limit what I use the computer for. I purchased WinRAR when I had DOS and WFWG 3.11 and the licence I purchased way back then has licensed me for all versions since that time. A number of software authors use this model.Rarlab still exists, and release regular updates. And without me paying, paying again, and paying again, and again... Commercial software authors are just like everyone else, vying for a portion of the pie, a slice of the limited and finite resources that people have available to them. They are selling a product and hope to convince people that it is worth paying our for...often over and over again. The simple fact is that only a few will be able to make a decent living from this practice, not the many...and those that believe that they deserve to make a living just because they are creating something are misguided, and haven't worked out that it is other people value their product, not them. If you get that wrong, then you don't get paidand you'll need to look for another way to make money. -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #29051. Who Win Dog Seer? ¶ Auxiliary Information: • The Bat! Pro 4.2.9.1 • Windows XP Pro 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 • Scanned by avast! Plugin 4.8.1335 DB 090727-0 (27.07.2009) Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Luca, Monday, July 27, 2009, 7:05:25 PM, among other things, you wrote: L> Unfortunately, my version of the Sniper (3.2.1.1 free) hangs when I try to L> access the white list configuration. I still run version 3.2.0.6 as I see that a number of its features are now only available in the Pro version of 3.2.1.1. However, I briefly installed 3.2.1.1 to see whether I experienced your problem and I'm sorry to say ( for your sake!)that that the White list opened normally. Did you start with 3.2.1.1 or did you upgrade from an earlier version? -- Best regards, Roger :flag-SouthAfrica: The Bat! v4.2.9.4 POP3with AntiSpamSniper 3.2.0.6, on Windows XP, version 5 1, build 2600 and Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Roger Phillips: > Monday, July 27, 2009, 1:57:44 PM, among other things, you wrote: > > L> I get a large number of false > L> positives, and I can't stop it from putting some particular messages in my > L> junk folder (e.g., the monthly tbul subscription reminder). It simply won't > L> understand. > Have you added TBUDL to the 'White list'? Unfortunately, my version of the Sniper (3.2.1.1 free) hangs when I try to access the white list configuration. It seems like when there's some dialog open, behind other windows or offscreen, that you can't access. I can't even get to it with alt+spacebar, I have to kill TB and restart. -- Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at linuxfan.it Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Simon, On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:40:42 +0100 GMT (27/Jul/09, 15:40 PM +0700 GMT), Simon wrote: S>>> "Let people..." is a curious turn of phrase. Interesting, capitalism S>>> masquerading as an ideology. >> It is the same philosophy with which people say that everything on the >> internet should be free. S> I don't see how that can be the same. Well, we were talking about free downloads, or was I mistaken? >> Heck, they want all software to be free and will not pay any money, for >> example, for an email client. S> I think that is a vast oversimplificationand not just necessarily so! OK, I'll listen. S> A distinction was made very early on between commercial, shareware, S> freeware, donationware, cardware...blah-ware software. This was S> necessary because not every software author sat down at their S> computer to spend inordinate amounts of time tapping away at their S> keyboards simply because they saw the potential financial rewards S> ahead. I agree. In the beginning, many people wrote software for free. Then some of them realised that it is a full-time job they are doing, and they should be rewarded for it. They needed to buy some rice (or bread or potato(e)s or pasta). S> Aside the above, you have everyone from Ahab who is 10, to S> Desidimona who is 80, And Mary, who is 82! S> with access to a computer, and they, and everyone else, want S> various softwares to run on their computers, otherwise computers S> would be useless. Is that so. A computer without Adobe Photoshop is not useless to me. If it is to you, maybe you want to share in the development cost of that software? S> The term 'software' obviously covers a huge spectrum, such as S> Operating Systems, web browsers, email clients, bitmap editors, S> graph paper printers, automation software, media players, PDF S> viewers, privacy software, (continue on ad infinitum) etc. Just S> count the number of programs sitting on your computer and then S> calculate the cost if every single one of those was a piece of S> commercial software, You mean a piece of software into which the developers put their time, knowledge, and energy, and have a family to feed. S> with regular, almost yearly pay-for updates, and you realise just S> how ludicrous this model is. It's a nonsense. You are not serious, are you? It really does sound as if you want the developers to donate their time and knowledge for free to those who have a feeling they want to use that software. Why would you think you have a right to enslave these people to program for free for you? S> "They" don't want all software to be free because "they" are evil, S> "they" haven't just got deep enough pockets to pay for every bit of S> software and every update. If you cannot afford it, you cannot use it. Same goes for expensive food or expensive cars. If you want it but cannot afford it, you have no implicit right to steal it or demand to get it for free. Sorry 'bout that, mate. S> Even within the so-called developed wealthier countries you have S> incredibly unequal distribution of wealth, with most of the wealth S> belonging to the top 7% to 12% of the population. Pareto says 20% of the people own 80% of the wealth. Anyway, there are different percentages around, depends on who you believe. I do agree with the idea of what of you are saying, though. S> A lot of people within these same countries live on or below S> subsistence levels, and then you look across the globe to other S> countries that are even worse off I live in a developing country, I know what you are talking about. S> and you see that the 'you-must-pay-for-everything' model of S> software distrubition is just madness. It does't work, it cannot S> work. It is called the "digital divide". Sadly enough, it exists. However, there are freeware products for everything. Some programmers choose to produce freeware and donate their time, others need to make a living and need that income from shareware. Tell me what it is that doesn't work. Living in a developing country in which the Windows OS costs as much as a monthly salary, the digital divide was certainly more than just mentioned in my MSc in Computing. S> A few hundred pieces of software on one PC is really not an S> uncommon figure for many people, now calculate a total purchase S> price, and they a yearly fee to keep every one up to date. Far too S> many people don't even earn those sort of amounts each month (or S> even much longer) So they cannot afford that software and the next update. S> so my heart does not immediately bleed for software authors who are S> looking to get rich out of volume distribution LOL! There are several software authors reading this list, and I would not think any one of them has gotten rich. S> and then getting angry at the bad people for not wanting to S> playinstead of accepting that the whole model is flawed and S> perhaps the whole idea needs rethinking. The model is fine. The thinking that anybody has a right to
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Roger, Monday, July 27, 2009, 16:55:02, you wrote: >I have never had trouble with ASS throwing out TB messages. Neither have I ;) -- Regards, Chrillemailto:numbe...@thebat.net Using The Bat! 4.2.9.1 AntispamSniper Pro v 3.2.1.1 Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Luca, Monday, July 27, 2009, 1:57:44 PM, among other things, you wrote: L> I get a large number of false L> positives, and I can't stop it from putting some particular messages in my L> junk folder (e.g., the monthly tbul subscription reminder). It simply won't L> understand. Have you added TBUDL to the 'White list'? I have never had trouble with ASS throwing out TB messages. -- Best regards, Roger :flag-SouthAfrica: The Bat! v4.2.9.4 POP3with AntiSpamSniper 3.2.0.6, on Windows XP, version 5 1, build 2600 and Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Robin Anson: > On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 at 15:22:48 +0100, Privateofcourse wrote:> Hello TBUDL, > > I've done a bit of leg work, but it seems to me that the majority of > > so-called 'SPAM blocker/stopper' solutions don't and can't really do > > anything other than allow you to manage SPAM after-the-fact. That is, SPAM > > isn't actually blocked or stopped at all, but is managed after it has been > > received. > > I wouldn't use something that stopped or blocked SPAM for me. I don't trust > anyone else to make the decision about whether something is SPAM because I > have seen a small number, but that is too many, of emails incorrectly > classified as SPAM. I support providers with good RBL filtering, that's the real solution. Content filtering is only useful to gather spam messages into a single folder, once you've downloaded them. I wouldn't use any mailbox with content filtering if it's the provider to manage it. -- Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at linuxfan.it Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Code 2: > > AntispamSniper > Agreed. After about 30,000 e-mail messages including 1,400 spam > messages, my stats are showing 98.97% accuracy and only 0.08% false > positives. I use Antispamsniper, the free version. I guess there is no way to make it work after the normal TB filters, is it? I get a large number of false positives, and I can't stop it from putting some particular messages in my junk folder (e.g., the monthly tbul subscription reminder). It simply won't understand. I'd be satisfied if I could just make my filters work to save my good messages before the sniper shot'em down. -- Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at linuxfan.it Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions [now OT]
'Ello MFPA, On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 02:21:57 +0100 (your time) you said: > The problem is the greedy capitalist [insert desired expletive] who > pays people just enough to stop them from leaving instead of paying the > value of their contribution. I have absolutely no argument there. I completely agree that 'a workman is worthy of his hire', to steal from an old religious book. People are criminally undervalued, vastly overworked, and grossly underpaid, that's how capitalism works. > This leads them to expect others to also work for next to nothing and > feeds into a downward spiral that leads to nobody valuing what anybody > else does. To some extent I would agree, but I don't believe that it inevitably leads to nobody valuing what anybody does, rather it makes those with less money in their pockets fight much harder to get the services and 'things' cheaper, so that they can afford them. It's a con sequence of an uneven distribution of wealth, where the least wealthy have grown in massive disporportion, have less financial power to bargain with so strive to drive down prices so that they are not excluded from partipation. I heard someone say that if there weren't poor people then the world would be a better place. The person saying it was a businessman running a factory with over 300 workers who had just gone on strike because of work conditions and low wage complaints. You're either on one side or the other in this world! -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #36541. I She Row New Dog? ¶ Auxiliary Information: • The Bat! Pro 4.2.9.1 • Windows XP Pro 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 • Scanned by avast! Plugin 4.8.1335 DB 090726-1 (26.07.2009) Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
'Ello Thomas, On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:41:05 +0700 (your time) you said: S>> "Let people..." is a curious turn of phrase. Interesting, capitalism S>> masquerading as an ideology. > It is the same philosophy with which people say that everything on the > internet should be free. I don't see how that can be the same. > Heck, they want all software to be free and will not pay any money, for > example, for an email client. I think that is a vast oversimplificationand not just necessarily so! A distinction was made very early on between commercial, shareware, freeware, donationware, cardware...blah-ware software. This was necessary because not every software author sat down at their computer to spend inordinate amounts of time tapping away at their keyboards simply because they saw the potential financial rewards ahead. Aside the above, you have everyone from Ahab who is 10, to Desidimona who is 80, with access to a computer, and they, and everyone else, want various softwares to run on their computers, otherwise computers would be useless. The term 'software' obviously covers a huge spectrum, such as Operating Systems, web browsers, email clients, bitmap editors, graph paper printers, automation software, media players, PDF viewers, privacy software, (continue on ad infinitum) etc. Just count the number of programs sitting on your computer and then calculate the cost if every single one of those was a piece of commercial software, with regular, almost yearly pay-for updates, and you realise just how ludicrous this model is. It's a nonsense. "They" don't want all software to be free because "they" are evil, "they" haven't just got deep enough pockets to pay for every bit of software and every update. Even within the so-called developed wealthier countries you have incredibly unequal distribution of wealth, with most of the wealth belonging to the top 7% to 12% of the population. A lot of people within these same countries live on or below subsistence levels, and then you look across the globe to other countries that are even worse off and you see that the 'you-must-pay-for-everything' model of software distrubition is just madness. It does't work, it cannot work. A few hundred pieces of software on one PC is really not an uncommon figure for many people, now calculate a total purchase price, and they a yearly fee to keep every one up to date. Far too many people don't even earn those sort of amounts each month (or even much longer) so my heart does not immediately bleed for software authors who are looking to get rich out of volume distribution and then getting angry at the bad people for not wanting to playinstead of accepting that the whole model is flawed and perhaps the whole idea needs rethinking. S>> I'll remember to tell the altruist that gives up their free time and S>> money that they should desist with their beneficent activities because S>> they should be paid for their troubles, because they are the rules, and S>> fairness demands it. > Exactly. You will not believe how many heated arguments we had, I think > the 90s were the time when users just demanded to get all software and > even online time for free. They thought they had a right to be provided > with free services and software. Again, an oversimplifcation. At those times 'Free' didn't actually mean 'free'. 'Free' hasn't meant gratis for a very long time. The tenner-a-month ISPs in the UK back then (the 90's) advertised their services as unlimited free access for only £10 per month :-/ People were jumping onboard because their telecoms companies were exploiting this new source of revenue from Interent access and phone bills had soared out of control. People were finding themselves with bills for hundreds of pounds a month just for connecting to the Internet to collect email and chat. When there is limited access to a money pot (which is all of the time IOW) 'people' will naturally and fairly be looking for cheaper, if not gratis, solutions for most things, and quite rightly. I support them in their efforts 100%. And it is nothing to do with valuing the efforts of others...not in the slightest. Just because you decide to create something doesn't automatically give you the right to have an income gain from it. Blimey, all the great art in the world, and all the musical masterpieces written, would never have been created if that was the way it really worked! -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #21639. I Sow Grew No Edh? ¶ Auxiliary Information: • The Bat! Pro 4.2.9.1 • Windows XP Pro 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 • Scanned by avast! Plugin 4.8.1335 DB 090726-1 (26.07.2009) Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions [now OT]
Hi On Sunday 26 July 2009 at 11:45:14 PM, in , Simon wrote: > I'll remember to tell the altruist that gives up their > free time and money that they should desist with their > beneficent activities because they should be paid for > their troubles, because they are the rules, and > fairness demands it. At risk of being ruled off-topic, I will chip in that the issue is not the altruist who chooses to do it for nothing. The problem is the greedy capitalist [insert desired expletive] who pays people just enough to stop them from leaving instead of paying the value of their contribution. This leads them to expect others to also work for next to nothing and feeds into a downward spiral that leads to nobody valuing what anybody else does. -- Best regards, MFPA When duty calls...hang up immediately Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Simon, On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 23:45:14 +0100 GMT (27/Jul/09, 5:45 AM +0700 GMT), Simon wrote: P>>> I think the emphasis though must be on free solutions. >> Yes, I agree. Let people work for free, this is a centuries-old tradition. >> I have no idea why I pay for services, anyway. S> "Let people..." is a curious turn of phrase. Interesting, capitalism S> masquerading as an ideology. It is the same philosophy with which people say that everything on the internet should be free. Heck, they want all software to be free and will not pay any money, for example, for an email client. S> I'll remember to tell the altruist that gives up their free time and money S> that they should desist with their beneficent activities because they should S> be paid for their troubles, because they are the rules, and fairness demands S> it. Exactly. You will not believe how many heated arguments we had, I think the 90s were the time when users just demanded to get all software and even online time for free. They thought they had a right to be provided with free services and software. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.9 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
'Ello Thomas, On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 22:49:21 +0700 (your time) you said: P>> I think the emphasis though must be on free solutions. > Yes, I agree. Let people work for free, this is a centuries-old tradition. > I have no idea why I pay for services, anyway. "Let people..." is a curious turn of phrase. Interesting, capitalism masquerading as an ideology. I'll remember to tell the altruist that gives up their free time and money that they should desist with their beneficent activities because they should be paid for their troubles, because they are the rules, and fairness demands it. -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #15175. We He Row Go Dins? ¶ Auxiliary Information: • The Bat! Pro 4.2.9.1 • Windows XP Pro 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 • Scanned by avast! Plugin 4.8.1335 DB 090726-1 (26.07.2009) Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
> Yes, I agree. Let people work for free, this is a centuries-old > tradition. I have no idea why I pay for services, anyway. I pay for a spamcop.net account because reporting spammers may not stop them, but it helps dry up their sending sources. I may be shoveling against the tide but I feel that I am doing something -- Rick When you're caffeinated, all is right with the world v4.2.9.4 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Privateofcourse, On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:22:48 +0100 GMT (15/Jun/09, 21:22 +0700 GMT), Privateofcourse wrote: P> I've done a bit of leg work, but it seems to me that the majority P> of so-called 'SPAM blocker/stopper' solutions don't and can't P> really do anything other than allow you to manage SPAM P> after-the-fact. That is, SPAM isn't actually blocked or stopped at P> all, but is managed after it has been received. That is true, unfortunately. There are enough ways for spammers to deliver their unwanted mails. P> But nonetheless, I suspect that for some this is better than P> nothing at all. You can only filter at receiving end. P> I think the emphasis though must be on free solutions. Yes, I agree. Let people work for free, this is a centuries-old tradition. I have no idea why I pay for services, anyway. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.1.11 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Setting SPAM filter to run after other filters
Hallo Carren, On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 19:18:07 +1200GMT (26-7-2009, 9:18 +0200, where I live), you wrote: CS> I'm using the built in BayesIT spam filter which works pretty CS> well, but is there some way of setting it to filter incoming mail AFTER my other filters have run? No there isn't. plug-in filters are always executed before the sorting office. The only way to get rid of your false positives is by training your spam filter. -- Groetjes, Roelof I think, therefore, I cannot be a moderator. http://www.voormijalleen.nl/ The Bat! 4.2.9.4 Windows Vista 6.0 Build 6001 Service Pack 1 6 pop3 accounts, 1 imap account OTFE enabled Quad Core 2.4GHz 4 GB RAM pgpM3sfVELvbA.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Setting SPAM filter to run after other filters
Hello Carren, Sunday, July 26, 2009, 9:18:07 AM, among other things, you wrote: CS> I'm using the built in BayesIT spam filter which works pretty well, but CS> is there some way of setting it to filter incoming mail AFTER my other CS> filters have run? I don't think so. CS> In spite of me attempting to train it to recognise CS> TBDUL mail as "not junk" - much of my list mail is still ending up in CS> the junk folder. I think most of us gave up using BayesIt quite a long time ago and switched to AntispamSniper for the Bat!.You can get the download at www.antispamsniper.com , perhaps you should give it a try. However it still won't run after other filters, but once trained gives very few false positives, or negatives! -- Best regards, Roger :flag-SouthAfrica: The Bat! v4.2.9.1 POP3with AntiSpamSniper 3.2.0.6, on Windows XP, version 5 1, build 2600 and Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Setting SPAM filter to run after other filters
Hi I'm using the built in BayesIT spam filter which works pretty well, but is there some way of setting it to filter incoming mail AFTER my other filters have run? In spite of me attempting to train it to recognise TBDUL mail as "not junk" - much of my list mail is still ending up in the junk folder. If I run a "re-filter" on the folder my custom filters happily put the mail back where it should be, but it's a major pain to have to do it this way. I'm probably missing something really obvious but whatever it is I'm just not "getting it". -- Best regards, Carrenmailto:kiwionab...@xnet.co.nz Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Recommendations for Anti-Spam Plugin for TB?
Sunday, July 19, 2009, 4:14:48 AM, you wrote: > I am intrigued by the statement on > the AntiSpam Sniper site that the plug-in can delete SPAM right on the > server. That would save me a lot of needless download time. I tried Antispam-Sniper recently but went back to Mailwasher (not as plug in but stand-alone). For me the ability to delete mail on the server without having to download it first is important. While antispamsniper obviously can do that, I got frustrated that each time I wanted to check my email accounts (about 10 of them), it took several minutes for the process to finish. This seems to relate to the checking process against various databases but in Mailwasher it is done much faster. It also allows me to check on individual spam or its headers before nuking them. -- Tom using TheBat! 4.2.6 on XP Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Recommendations for Anti-Spam Plugin for TB?
Thanks for hyperlink and the recommendation. I'll look into AntiSpam Sniper. I currently use PopFile 1.1.0 to eliminate or reduce SPAM. I got forced into using some measure when the anti-spam filter used by my ISP suddenly stopped working and I became inundated with SPAM. PopFile works OK. It doesn't know what SPAM is. It has to be trained to recognize SPAM by content. The downside is that PopFile runs on the client PC. All email being checked for SPAM must be downloaded and examined to determine how to handle. I am intrigued by the statement on the AntiSpam Sniper site that the plug-in can delete SPAM right on the server. That would save me a lot of needless download time. > I use Antispamsniper (as a lot of persons on this list i assume). It's > a plugin for TB! and has a freeware version. After trying several > programs, it's one that i use for a long time now. > http://www.antispamsniper.com/thebat_plugin.html -- Lawrence Johnson mailto:prairiepeda...@gmail.com Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Recommendations for Anti-Spam Plugin for TB?
> Hello Jouni, > Thursday, July 16, 2009, 01:18:14, you wrote: >> Hi all, >> I would like to receive some recommendations, based on personal >> experience, as to which Anti-Spam Plugin solution would be worthwhile. >> I wouldn't mind paying something for a working solution. > Once again I recommend AntispamSniper pro. It does an extremely good job. +1 I use the pro version and it does an excellent job. You have to train it but it "learns" fairly quickly. It uses several RBLs like Spamcop to help determine if an email is spam so if you installed it and just downloaded your mail and nothing else, it would probably catch 80 -90% of the spam -- Rick It is a good rule in life never to apologize. The right sort of people do not want apologies, and the wrong sort take a mean advantage of them. - P. G. Wodehouse v4.2.7.2 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Recommendations for Anti-Spam Plugin for TB?
Hello Jouni, Thursday, July 16, 2009, 01:18:14, you wrote: > Hi all, > I would like to receive some recommendations, based on personal > experience, as to which Anti-Spam Plugin solution would be worthwhile. > I wouldn't mind paying something for a working solution. Once again I recommend AntispamSniper pro. It does an extremely good job. -- Regards, Chrillemailto:numbe...@thebat.net Using The Bat! 4.2.6 AntispamSniper Pro v 3.2.1.1 Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Recommendations for Anti-Spam Plugin for TB?
Hello Jouni, It was foretold that on 15/07/2009 @ 02:18:14 GMT+0300 (which was 20:18:14 where I live) Jouni Kukkonen would write: > I've been using TB for some time now, in a very simple way, and would > now like to add Anti-Spam capability to it, as not everyone of my > e-mail service providers does a good job filtering spam. > I would like to receive some recommendations, based on personal > experience, as to which Anti-Spam Plugin solution would be worthwhile. > I wouldn't mind paying something for a working solution. I use Antispamsniper (as a lot of persons on this list i assume). It's a plugin for TB! and has a freeware version. After trying several programs, it's one that i use for a long time now. http://www.antispamsniper.com/thebat_plugin.html -- Best regards, Luc Using the best e-mail client: The Bat! version 4.1.5 with Windows XP (build 2600), version 5.1 Service Pack 3 and using the best browser: Opera. "Acting is just a way of making a living, the family is life." - Denzel Washington (1954-). Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Recommendations for Anti-Spam Plugin for TB?
Hi all, I've been using TB for some time now, in a very simple way, and would now like to add Anti-Spam capability to it, as not everyone of my e-mail service providers does a good job filtering spam. I would like to receive some recommendations, based on personal experience, as to which Anti-Spam Plugin solution would be worthwhile. I wouldn't mind paying something for a working solution. The very reason for this question is my recent tryout with the Anti-Spam Marisuite Plugin, which did absolutely nothing to my incoming messages. After a short exchange with the supplier it became clear that Marisuite does not do IMAP filtering because of lack of support in the TB API that the plugins use (at least this is what they say). Nearly all my mailboxes are IMAP boxes, so the solution will need to work with IMAP as well as with POP3. I'm trying to save myself from further futile experiments... I will be very greatful for all suggestions. Jouni Kukkonen Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hi On Friday 19 June 2009 at 10:43:13 AM, in , Privateofcourse wrote: > Thanks for the detailed info. Interesting method. I > personally use the old way of creating company / > contact specific email aliases: everyone has their own > contact email address IOW. Of course this means > creating forwarders for every new contact, but then you > can identify immediately where SPAM has come from...and > inform whoever it is that has leaked the email address > that they've got a problem. I also then delete the > forwarder for them and give them a new, 'clean' > alias/contact email address. > For this purpose I use a separate domain name to my > personal (friends and family only IOW) one, and of > course there is a default address that I give out if I > can't set up a new forwarder for someone/a contact > there and then. When I'm next at my PC I'll set up a > new forwarder for whoever it is and send them an email > asking them to update their contact details. I use catch-all forwarding rather than setting up lots of forwarders and make use of filters in TB! to dump mail addressed to any unrecognised alias into an "other incoming" folder. Not as rigorous as your system but it means I can invent contact email addresses on the fly if I want and set up filters for them later. > I also create a monthly temp alias with a 8 digit code. > Eg. > temp.yu854...@domain.co.uk > and use this for all other contact forms and such like. > Every month I simply delete the alias and create a new > one, excluding the temp address, this particular setup > is near as dammit 100% SPAM free. I used to do this six-monthly but now change it annually, unless SPAM catches up with it. It rarely gets more than 3 or 4 SPAM messages a day. I also use a separate yahoo addresss for this and two other mailing lists, which I change annually or thereabouts. For signing up on websites I tend to use disposible address services - pookmail.com and dodgmail.com seem to be defunct now but getonemail.com still worked recently. > My personal email does get occasional SPAM, and I keep > having to update the filters in cPanel. But I've just > been reading about the free Comodo AntiSpam software, > which is a free challenge and response system. This > 'looks' promising, and may be the solution I've been > looking for my personal communications. Some people seem to like those challenge/response things. I never reply to them as they look like some sort of attempt to harvest valid email addresses. Even if genuine, anybody who makes it that awkward to contact them must be pretty special for me to bother with them (-; -- Best regards, MFPA A bird in the hand makes it awfully hard to blow your nose Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Privateofcourse, Monday, June 15, 2009, 4:22:48 PM, you wrote: > I've done a bit of leg work, but it seems to me that the majority of > so-called 'SPAM blocker/stopper' solutions don't and can't really do > anything other than allow you to manage SPAM after-the-fact. That is, SPAM > isn't actually blocked or stopped at all, but is managed after it has been > received. Well, yes, that's exactly what you have to expect *if* you want to deal with spam on the MUA (i.e. TB!) level. You can't really expect your email program (which typically is completely separate from your mail server) to decide which emails need to be accepted and which need to be rejected. > But nonetheless, I suspect that for some this is better than > nothing at all. Agree. As for me, I used to use AntispamSniper for some time (and BayesIt! before that). The main drawbacks were: - severe limitations on using encrypted connections to the server, - me wanting to access an acount from more than one PC -- this did not fit nicely with the idea of client-side filtering, - me deciding TB! was too unreliable and switching to IMAP account. For reference: my current setup is a mail server (Postfix + Dovecot) which has SpamAssassin process incoming emails. SA only flags these emails (adds rating information to header). Then, a Sieve script run by Dovecot does the actual actions: suspected spam is moved to Junk folder; if it's obvious spam it is additionally marked as Read. So, as for checking for false positives: from time to time I can review all messages that have been marked as spam, and, on a daily basis, I see the ones that were not marked as Read (i.e. not obvious). The lessons learned here are: - this works independently of the MUAs I use to access my email base (I use more than just TB!), - SA is far more thorough than any client plugins (it offers more checks, the rules are updated often, etc.), - this is a part of a bigger filtering scheme; the filtering happens on server side and I am not forced to rely on TB!'s extremely unreliable filtering; the individual email automatically get dispatched into proper folders. - I *could* implement a true spam rejection scheme by enabling e.g. greylisting in Postfix but the current setup works so well that I don't feel the need to do so. One wish I have would be for TB! to allow assigning Junk folder to a server folder -- please support my wish here: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=6483 So much for the description of my setup. It probably won't help you or your friends/ family but should allow you to set the expectations. You always can: - use an email provider that has reasonable filtering (e.g. GMail), - try to use something like AntispamSniper to filter spam. Also, I think that trying to write your own set of rules for TB!'s filter mechanism is bound to fail. This might allow you to filter out a significant part of spam volume but in practice, if you get 100 spam messages per day instead of 300, does it really help you? -- Best regards, Robert Tomanekmailto:tb...@mail.robert.tomanek.org Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello tb...@thebat., Friday, June 19, 2009, 7:43:13 PM, you wrote: P> Hello Paul, ... P> My personal email does get occasional SPAM, and I keep having to update the P> filters in cPanel. But I've just been reading about the free Comodo AntiSpam P> software, which is a free challenge and response system. This 'looks' P> promising, and may be the solution I've been looking for my personal P> communications. Your method looks pretty good. If you need an excellent service for creating disposable email addresses, I recommend gishpuppy.com -- Paul - Using The Bat! v4.2.4 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 ...The best cure for insomnia is to get a lot of sleep. Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Paul, This is what you said on Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:47:13 +1000 your time: > I get nearly all spam, do not use an external filter yet. > My ISP offers free spam filtering, so I use this. It stops the > download of 60% to 70%. > I use internal mail filters along these lines: [...snip...] Thanks for the detailed info. Interesting method. I personally use the old way of creating company / contact specific email aliases: everyone has their own contact email address IOW. Of course this means creating forwarders for every new contact, but then you can identify immediately where SPAM has come from...and inform whoever it is that has leaked the email address that they've got a problem. I also then delete the forwarder for them and give them a new, 'clean' alias/contact email address. For this purpose I use a separate domain name to my personal (friends and family only IOW) one, and of course there is a default address that I give out if I can't set up a new forwarder for someone/a contact there and then. When I'm next at my PC I'll set up a new forwarder for whoever it is and send them an email asking them to update their contact details. I also create a monthly temp alias with a 8 digit code. Eg. temp.yu854...@domain.co.uk and use this for all other contact forms and such like. Every month I simply delete the alias and create a new one, excluding the temp address, this particular setup is near as dammit 100% SPAM free. My personal email does get occasional SPAM, and I keep having to update the filters in cPanel. But I've just been reading about the free Comodo AntiSpam software, which is a free challenge and response system. This 'looks' promising, and may be the solution I've been looking for my personal communications. -- Simon (Privateofcourse) # 9200. I Hog Wend Sower? ¶ TB! 4.2.4 WinXP Pro Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Chrille, This is what you said on Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:21:21 +0200 your time: > I use Antispamsniper Pro and I'm extremely satisfied with it. I believe > they have a free edition as well. Thanks, I'll take a look at the free version :-) JOOC, does it not 'stick in your craw' that by buying a solution *you* have ended up picking up the tab for dealing with SPAM? It rather seems to me that we have a situation where the SPAMer is on the make, the solution provider is on the make, and everyone else forms the big pocket that both parties want to dip into. This may seem a bit cynical, but there ya go ;-) -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #21123. Row Gown Die Hes? ¶ TB! 4.2.4 WinXP Pro Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Raymond and Jens, This is what you both said on Mon, 15 Jun 2009: > AntispamSniper [...] Thanks, I'll take a look myself first, and then assess whether saying nothing would be better (for me) than suggesting it ;-) -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #23818. God Hews No Weir? ¶ TB! 4.2.4 WinXP Pro Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello tb...@thebat., Tuesday, June 16, 2009, 12:22:48 AM, you wrote: P> Hello TBUDL, P> What do TB! users consider to be the P> 1) the best external SPAM management solution for TB! users? P> 2) the best internal SPAM management solution for TB! users? ... I get nearly all spam, do not use an external filter yet. My ISP offers free spam filtering, so I use this. It stops the download of 60% to 70%. I use internal mail filters along these lines: Not using Selective Download. Sequence of filters is important: Incoming Mail Not using Selective Download. Sequence is important: Incoming Mail The Bat Filters 25 December 2006 Not use Selective Download. Sequence is important Incoming Mail The Bat Header contains TBUDL Or Header contains tbudl Or Header contains thebat.dutaint.com Action: Move to folder …TheBat SpamHeader contains mpx.com Or Sender contains From PBSender contains berg...@optusnet.com.au RamblersHeader contains ramblers Or Recipient contains Action: Move to folder …Ramblers Reply Welcome Address Book contains sender Or Recipient contains spammotel.com Or Header contains mailnull.com Or Header contains my-etrust.com Or Sender contains melbpc.org.au Or Sender contains optusnet.com.au And about 20 other senders Action: Move to folder …Welcome Access Sender contains Access Action: Move to folder …Access SIG Spam Last Filter Recipient does not contain berg...@optusnet.com.au And Recipient does not contain mailnull.com And Recipient does not contain spammotel.com Action: Move to folder …Trash As you can see, the idea is to first pick out the mail that you want to put in separate folders. Had to add a filter for emails "sent by me" and put them in a separate folder to glance at and trash, because spammers are now spoofing my address as sender. Then finally you trash the emails that are not addressed to you - they are addressed to you in an outer layer, which is dicarded before you see them; inside they appear with different addressees. The rubbish is left in the Inbox and in From PB folders. Here you set the sort order by Subject for a quick glance at everything. Will be intereted in the replies you get for other solutions. The spammers are very quick to find a new address. I changed the disposable address on a web site, and got spam a few days later. -- Paul - Using The Bat! v4.2.4 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 ...I cna ytpe 300 wrods pre mniuet!!! Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 at 15:22:48 +0100, Privateofcourse wrote:> Hello TBUDL, > I've done a bit of leg work, but it seems to me that the majority of > so-called 'SPAM blocker/stopper' solutions don't and can't really do > anything other than allow you to manage SPAM after-the-fact. That is, SPAM > isn't actually blocked or stopped at all, but is managed after it has been > received. I wouldn't use something that stopped or blocked SPAM for me. I don't trust anyone else to make the decision about whether something is SPAM because I have seen a small number, but that is too many, of emails incorrectly classified as SPAM. However I use a combination of Popfile and Antispam Sniper for the Bat Free. Either by itself is very good, the combination is excellent. -- Robin Using The Bat! v4.1.11 Windows Vista 6.0 Build 6002 Service Pack 2 Popfile v1.1.0 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
>> What do TB! users consider to be the >> 1) the best external SPAM management solution for TB! users? > > 2) the best internal SPAM management solution for TB! users? > AntispamSniper Agreed. After about 30,000 e-mail messages including 1,400 spam messages, my stats are showing 98.97% accuracy and only 0.08% false positives. AntispamSniper required ongoing training in the initial months, but now it nabs the spam very reliably. -- Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Privateofcourse, Monday, June 15, 2009, 16:22:48, you wrote: > Hello TBUDL, > What do TB! users consider to be the > 1) the best external SPAM management solution for TB! users? > 2) the best internal SPAM management solution for TB! users? > I think the emphasis though must be on free solutions. I use Antispamsniper Pro and I'm extremely satisfied with it. I believe they have a free edition as well. -- Regards, Chrillemailto:numbe...@thebat.net Using The Bat! 4.2.6 Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Privateofcourse, Monday, June 15, 2009, 9:22:48 AM, you wrote: > Hello TBUDL, > What do TB! users consider to be the > 1) the best external SPAM management solution for TB! users? > 2) the best internal SPAM management solution for TB! users? > First, this isn't for me, as I manage SPAM via convoluted email practises > and via cPanel, and so for a lot of years now I've not had much of a > problem with SPAM - well of course I do get a few bits of SPAM every now > and then, but only enough to be slightly irritated by them getting through. > This question is really for friends and family that I've converted to TB! > over the years. Many of them use their ISP mail accounts, and the like, and > so and are after alternative solutions to dealing with SPAM. As I've not > used any of the TB! plugins or used the external solutions, like SPAMPAL > and Mailwasher Pro for some time, I thought I'd ask people with more > up-to-date experiences. > I've done a bit of leg work, but it seems to me that the majority of > so-called 'SPAM blocker/stopper' solutions don't and can't really do > anything other than allow you to manage SPAM after-the-fact. That is, SPAM > isn't actually blocked or stopped at all, but is managed after it has been > received. But nonetheless, I suspect that for some this is better than > nothing at all. > I think the emphasis though must be on free solutions. AntispamSniper -- Best regards, Raymond Morris TheBat! Voyager 4.1.11.1 www.ritlabs.com AntispamSniper 3.2.0.6 for The Bat! Voyager rmorri...@gmail.com :texasflag: Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
anti-SPAM solutions
Hello TBUDL, What do TB! users consider to be the 1) the best external SPAM management solution for TB! users? 2) the best internal SPAM management solution for TB! users? First, this isn't for me, as I manage SPAM via convoluted email practises and via cPanel, and so for a lot of years now I've not had much of a problem with SPAM - well of course I do get a few bits of SPAM every now and then, but only enough to be slightly irritated by them getting through. This question is really for friends and family that I've converted to TB! over the years. Many of them use their ISP mail accounts, and the like, and so and are after alternative solutions to dealing with SPAM. As I've not used any of the TB! plugins or used the external solutions, like SPAMPAL and Mailwasher Pro for some time, I thought I'd ask people with more up-to-date experiences. I've done a bit of leg work, but it seems to me that the majority of so-called 'SPAM blocker/stopper' solutions don't and can't really do anything other than allow you to manage SPAM after-the-fact. That is, SPAM isn't actually blocked or stopped at all, but is managed after it has been received. But nonetheless, I suspect that for some this is better than nothing at all. I think the emphasis though must be on free solutions. -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #18866. Her Wow Gins Oed? ¶ TB! 4.2.4 WinXP Pro Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Disabling spam filter
Hi On Tuesday 27 January 2009 at 11:50:34 PM, in , Stuart Cuddy wrote: > you can de-select the show this window automatically check box. This > will cause TB to ignore HTML pictures and act like TB used to. Brilliant. I saw this window rarely enough that it was only a minor irritation. Now you have told me how to suppress it. Thank you! -- Best regards, MFPA Don't ask me, I'm making this up as I go! Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.1.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Disabling spam filter
Hi On Tuesday 27 January 2009 at 10:04:47 PM, in , Dwight Corrin wrote: > you can always just allow everything How? (Just curious.) -- Best regards, MFPA Yellow snow is not lemon flavoured Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.1.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Disabling spam filter
Hi On Wednesday 28 January 2009 at 4:28:04 AM, in , Jens Franik wrote: > Mittwoch, 28. Januar 2009 at 01:05, Lynn wrote: >> I'm not seeing an earth icon. Perhaps I have an >> alternate skin or toolbox option? > More likely, that you have to view a HTML Mail to make > it appear. It only appears here if I click on the HTML tab of an email that has external links (to images or whatever.) I usually only do that if the layout of the plaintext display is too poor to understand the message and I think it might be something important or interesting. -- Best regards, MFPA I think not, said Descartes, and promptly disappeared Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.1.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Disabling spam filter
Mittwoch, 28. Januar 2009 at 01:05, Lynn wrote: > I'm not seeing an earth icon. > Perhaps I have an alternate skin or toolbox option? More likely, that you have to view a HTML Mail to make it appear. The other way is to customize the Toolbar and set up the Icon yourself. It is in All_Actions/Message_Viewer/Show_URL_Manager -- With kind Regards Jens Franik mailto:je...@gmx.de Picture of me? X-Rogue http://www.de2all.de/Kr_bat.jpg The Bat! 4.1.11 mit AntiSpamSniper 3.1.0.5 und Gaijin XMP Makro Plugin 1.1.91.0 Windows XP 5.1 build 2600 Service Pack 2 AMD Athlon Dual Core 4850e 2,50 GHz, 4 GB RAM 7 POP3 Accounts - 120 Folders Current version is 4.1.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[3]: Disabling spam filter
Hello Lynn, Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 6:05:21 PM, you wrote: L> I discovered this accidentally a few minutes after I answered the last L> mail. At least I found the checkbox; I'm not seeing an earth icon. L> Perhaps I have an alternate skin or toolbox option? It only appears when you are viewing an HTML mail that has external links. -- Stuartmailto:skcu...@fastmail.fm Using The Bat! v4.1.9.3 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.1.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Disabling spam filter
1/27/2009 SC> If you are referring to the URL manager then you can disable it entirely or call SC> it up as needed. I was, yes. SC> To open it click on the earth icon on the header bar and select Show URL SC> Manager. There you can de-select the show this window automatically check box. SC> This will cause TB to ignore HTML pictures and act like TB used to. I discovered this accidentally a few minutes after I answered the last mail. At least I found the checkbox; I'm not seeing an earth icon. Perhaps I have an alternate skin or toolbox option? SC> You can also open this same window when you receive an email you want to see the SC> pictures in and allow them for that email. This usually lets all pictures from SC> that emailer through from that point on. If I can find it again now that I've got it turned off, I'll explore it further, but maybe I'll just leave it turned off :-) SC> I hope this is what you meant, if not please ignore me altogether. ;>) No, no, thanks very much! I was feeling really stupid, which of course adds to the aggravation! I'm much more mellow now that the thing is turned off! lol! And as a nice little bonus, while I was scanning those hundreds of messages trying to find a reference to the thing, I discovered I could pipe my gmail messages to TB. I went and did it - easiest config I've ever done, barring TB's basic configs - and that's working too. This is unquestionably the best support group on the net! Thanks to all who've replied! Lynn -- Lynn :Hawthorne: :usflag: :canadaflag: theli...@comcast.net * * *Aun Aprendo I'd rather be WARP'ed* * * Team OS/2 http://www.turriff.net TBv.4.1.9 NT5 SP4 Current version is 4.1.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Disabling spam filter
Hello Lynn, Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 3:03:21 PM, you wrote: L> If the thing can't be disabled altogether, is it at least possible to L> tell it to block or permit domain names? This business of L> allowing/blocking each individual gif or jpg is totally insane! They L> change with every mailing on much of this stuff, and filtering on those L> defeats the purpose entirely! If you are referring to the URL manager then you can disable it entirely or call it up as needed. To open it click on the earth icon on the header bar and select Show URL Manager. There you can de-select the show this window automatically check box. This will cause TB to ignore HTML pictures and act like TB used to. You can also open this same window when you receive an email you want to see the pictures in and allow them for that email. This usually lets all pictures from that emailer through from that point on. I hope this is what you meant, if not please ignore me altogether. ;>) -- Stuartmailto:scu...@mts.net Using The Bat! v4.1.9.3 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.1.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Disabling spam filter
1/27/2009 DC> you can always just allow everything I am thinking that will have to be it, and I'm sure I won't have to wait long before I see it again. I haven't even been able to find a way to bring the wretched thing up independently! I didn't think I was any stupider than usual, but I've really had it up to here with the thing. Thanks, though - -- Lynn :Hawthorne: :usflag: :canadaflag: theli...@comcast.net * * *Aun Aprendo I'd rather be WARP'ed* * * Team OS/2 http://www.turriff.net TBv.4.1.9 NT5 SP4 Current version is 4.1.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Disabling spam filter
On Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 3:56:27 PM, Lynn wrote: > Many have several roots, as many as 5 on the worst. And it is evident > that they change the content from mailing to mailing, so that one > determination is not enough. EBay notices frequently have several; since > various items/vendors are involved, how could they be the same? Should I > have to allow every vendor notification they send out??? I've been > fighting the thing ever since I installed that version. I can't believe > I'm the only user with this issue! you can always just allow everything -- Dwight A. Corrin 316.303.9385 phone ahead to fax dcorrin at fastmail.fm photo galleries at http://dcorrin.smugmug.com photo blog at http://dcorrin.aminus3.com Using IMAP with The Bat! 4.1.11 on Windows Vista version 6,0 () Current version is 4.1.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Disabling spam filter
1/27/2009 RO> You're talking about the Download URL manager, that isn't a spam RO> filter, but gives you the possibility to configure from what sites you RO> want to see the pictures and from what sites not. RO> Don't select the individual messages, but their root when choosing to RO> allow or block. Many have several roots, as many as 5 on the worst. And it is evident that they change the content from mailing to mailing, so that one determination is not enough. EBay notices frequently have several; since various items/vendors are involved, how could they be the same? Should I have to allow every vendor notification they send out??? I've been fighting the thing ever since I installed that version. I can't believe I'm the only user with this issue! RO> AFAIK You can't disable the feature. No offense, but I really, really, hope you are wrong. But .. thanks anyway. Lynn -- Lynn :Hawthorne: :usflag: :canadaflag: theli...@comcast.net * * *Aun Aprendo I'd rather be WARP'ed* * * Team OS/2 http://www.turriff.net TBv.4.1.9 NT5 SP4 Current version is 4.1.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Disabling spam filter
Hallo Lynn, On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:03:21 -0800GMT (27-1-2009, 22:03 +0100, where I live), you wrote: L> If the thing can't be disabled altogether, is it at least possible to L> tell it to block or permit domain names? This business of L> allowing/blocking each individual gif or jpg is totally insane! They L> change with every mailing on much of this stuff, and filtering on those L> defeats the purpose entirely! You're talking about the Download URL manager, that isn't a spam filter, but gives you the possibility to configure from what sites you want to see the pictures and from what sites not. Don't select the individual messages, but their root when choosing to allow or block. AFAIK You can't disable the feature. -- Groetjes, Roelof I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. http://www.voormijalleen.nl/ The Bat! 4.1.11 Windows Vista 6.0 Build 6001 Service Pack 1 3 pop3 accounts OTFE enabled Quad Core 2.4GHz 4 GB RAM pgpI9BwLNdvTW.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 4.1.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Disabling spam filter
Hi - Since I upgraded the last time, this spam device has driven me bonkers. I have just scanned over 800 messages here, and haven't found a fix, and can only hope I haven't missed it. Thanks be that Batters are so good about subject lines! If the thing can't be disabled altogether, is it at least possible to tell it to block or permit domain names? This business of allowing/blocking each individual gif or jpg is totally insane! They change with every mailing on much of this stuff, and filtering on those defeats the purpose entirely! TIA, and sorry for the desperation, but it takes me longer to mess with that than to delete the spam! Lynn -- Lynn :Hawthorne: :usflag: :canadaflag: theli...@comcast.net * * *Aun Aprendo I'd rather be WARP'ed* * * Team OS/2 http://www.turriff.net TBv.4.1.9 NT5 SP4 Current version is 4.1.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam from/via Tbudl Magnifique
Hi On Tuesday 1 July 2008 at 11:02:28 AM, in , Tom wrote: > For the second time I have now received a strange spam message into my > Tbudl account - this time with an attachment of about 5.88 mb called > Fractalsetp. I have not received these. I do not use any anti-spam software and yahoo's spamguard is switched off as it catches more good mail than spam. > Any suggestions on how to filter this type of message perhaps at > server level to prevent the download? You could filter on the string "Tbudl Magnifique". A search of my messagebase found this only in your original post and Roelof's reply. -- Best regards, MFPA I'll tell you what's the matter! This parrot is dead! Using The Bat! v4.0.14 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.0.24.0 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Spam from/via Tbudl Magnifique
Hallo Tom, On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 20:02:28 +1000GMT (1-7-2008, 12:02 +0200, where I live), you wrote: T> For the second time I have now received a strange spam message into my T> Tbudl account - this time with an attachment of about 5.88 mb called T> Fractalsetp. Got something like that, a couple of days ago. No text in the message a load French recipients and a 5+ MB powerpoint slide show. And sent to my tb-lists address. My virus scanner didn't find anything. T> Also, a receipt message was in my Outbox. Not here, but then I've got all of my accounts set to ignore receipt confirmation requests. T> Any suggestions on how to filter this type of message perhaps at T> server level to prevent the download? No. I simply deleted it. -- Groetjes, Roelof Cats are the proof of a higher purpose to the Universe http://www.voormijalleen.nl/ The Bat! 4.0.24.24 Windows Vista 6.0 Build 6001 Service Pack 1 3 pop3 accounts OTFE enabled Quad Core 2.4GHz 4 GB RAM pgph9sMzmbIXD.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 4.0.24.0 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
