Friday, September 24, 1999, 5:14:46 PM, Claude wrote:
> May be not, but it seems that *he* has 95% of spam different than
> yours :)
And an anecdotal aberration isn't something to give or countermand advice
upon.
> Do you think all the spammers *must* operate the same way ?
> That is not haw your spammers operate, but, well, why an other one
> couldn't do that ?
No. I never said that. What I did do was explain how the mail system
works in detail, what ISPs do and do not do and why spammer behavior is the
way it is. That, then, was to further explain the logic behind the filtering
system I described and why it works, why the false hits are so low and why the
positive hits are so high.
What he has done, however, was bring in his limited experience as a
countermand to my sound advice. Advice that I have clearly explained and is
based on my professional experience of 4+ years in the industry. Let me draw
an analogy for you.
A rocket scientist gives a lecture on how rockets work, why they work, to
what use they are put to, why they are used in that manner and what benefits
all of that bring the people he is speaking to. At the end of his lecture, a
man stands up and says, "You know, when I was a kid I built model rockets and
launched them. Some of them exploded. I don't think that your rockets do
much good for me."
What the man says is true. What the scientist said is true. However,
what the man said has no bearing on what the scientist has said though it is
presented in a manner which other people in the room will construe as a
challenge that has some merit because they superficially have some
resemblance.
IE, just because *HIS* spammers are acting in an manner not consistent
with the norm does not mean the norm is invalid. I have not stated that his
experience is wrong. I have stated, however, that his experience is not the
norm and that people are better advised to combat the norm than the
aberration.
> Why does someone may not trust you ? You've nothing to earn lying, I
> think, and your "<teacher cap>" post proved that you know the point.
> But why don't you trust the others ?
I never said I didn't trust people. Please point out where I stated that
I didn't trust his account.
> Do you think there's any interest for Arunas in writing fairies about
> the kind of spams *he* get ?
No. I am merely stressing that his case is not the norm, why they aren't
the norm and why it is better that he not press the issue.
> So *I* trust his experience *and* yours. They are different. What's
> the matter ?
One is the norm, one is not. One is based on personal anecdotal
information, the other on years of indirect experience and months of direct
experience with the protocols and procedures at hand.
> Don't you think there is at least *one* spammer in the whole world,
> who knows that better than you ;-)
No. I have not met such an individual yet. If there is such an
individual that is addressing each message, he has lost for, as I
demonstrated, the number of messages he sends out is dropped but the order of
a magnitude.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, click below and send the generated message.
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
