Hello Sergey, On Sunday, July 28, 2002 at 5:36:03 PM you [SU] wrote (at least in part):
SU> Filtering by X-Sender is a dead way. And who will be loosers in SU> this battle - I know - TB! users :-) [X-Sender = X-Mailer, already corrected on list] But that's no discussion point if ISP filtering for spam is illegal. Filtering for X-Mailer has to be done with the same precision and caution as filtering for 'From'. Take me for example. I administer several mail servers. And all of them carry a 'badmailfrom' file. If any of the addresses in that file is in 'Envelope-From' the mail is plainly rejected. I only have to take care what addresses are in there, else it would be simply carelessness but not illegal. Our customer we're administer the server for would cancel the contract if I put in to many addresses there, but he's thankful I _do_ put addresses there. The same with a 'badrcptto'. Everyday there's a mail to a non-existing address. One? Several! No problem ... if the bounces can be delivered. But there're some addresses reused again and again, albeit they never existed and will never exist. So a careful filled 'badrcptto' file will avoid the damn double bounces I usually get ... at least reduce them significant. Putting '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' into this file would make me loose my job, OK; but nevertheless this filter is, used carefully, a good thing. And all this applies to X-Mailer too. E.g. filtering for X-Mailer: This String with the phrase The Bat! in it was never used by an official RITLabs The Bat! release as SPAM protection, if one figured out a spam utility used this faked header is a good thing. If it really helps, or if the e.g. spelling mistake is corrected in next version of this tool is another story. The only thing BAD about the filter practise we're discussing is: An ISP filtered for 'X-Mailer' contains 'The Bat!'. This is stupid, as there at with a chance of 100% more false positives than correctly filtered mails but it doesn't make this less legal than blocking e.g. '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' as 'Envelope-From' or denying connections from <IP-Address-of-a-known-open-relay-that-it-used-by-spammers>. AR>> Skipping ads at the beginning of a DVD is a technical issue. SU> But it is spam :-). I bought film, not ads :-). No. You bought a DVD. The content is mainly a film (you're interested in, else you wouldn't have bought the DVD). If you're not able to skip the ads part (which is of course intended) this is a technical issue with your player. If your player could skip: fine for you. SU> Other words - spamming is just technical issue too :-). No. Spamming is using foreign resources without having requested permission. Spamming (done by others) harms me, my ISP and probably many others involved in transporting the mail. The ads on DVD don't. They cost you some seconds or minutes of time when you're nevertheless resting and taking 90 or 120 minutes of your time to see a movie. It's not the ads come 'stand alone' and you're only able to see the ads _instead_ of the movie. See it like Yahoo-Ads on e.g. TBOT. You get a mail and there's an advertisement in its footer. You get the ad while you're getting a mail nevertheless. -- Regards Peter Palmreuther mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Bat! v1.61 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1) There is no 'I' in 'team', yet there is an MVP. ________________________________________________________ Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ : http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
