Ok, this thread is way off topic now. As it seems of-interest to a section of members, rather than close it we have moved it to the discussion room: http://discuss.webstandardsgroup.org/archives/000017.htm
Any further discussion on this thread can take place in there but NOT on list. Thanks Russ > On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 17:41:32 +1000, Alan Harrison wrote: >> Mark is quite correct when he says that complex e-mail harvesters will >> probably work around these methods, but it appears that most of the >> harvesting is done by very basic programs that are looking only for e-mail >> addresses stored in conventional format. > > Assuming true intelligence on the part of a spammer is probably going > too far, but it does occur to me that it is in the interests of > spammers not to try too hard to collect addresses. > By only collecting the most easily found addresses (ie the > un-obfuscated ones) they: > 1) still get many millions of addresses to use and > 2) are less likely to reach the group that will report them. > > But that sort of thinking assumes sensible reasoning on the part of the > spammer. :) > > FTR - I've had great success with minimising spam with simple > replacement with character entities. Note that I also hide the > 'mailto:' part. > > Lea ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
