On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 04:22:07 -0700, "jdow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>From: "Nigel Frankcom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:10:25 -0800, John Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sunday 03 September 2006 01:03, Nigel Frankcom wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 10:25:40 -0700 (PDT), "John D. Hardin"
>>>
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, jdow wrote:
>>> >> Hm, I have a suspicion that the spam is being targeted quite
>>> >> differently then. Until the end of June I used to get about 250 to
>>> >> 300 spams a day. I am down to 90 to 150 per day now. It's unreal.
>>> >> Note that I am quite sincerely pleased by this development.
>>> >
>>> >...you think maybe they are listwashing SA list members?
>>>
>>> I don't think so, very little of the spam is aimed at my address as
>>> published on the SA list (cue a flood) :-D
>>
>>Er, but wouldn't THAT be suggestive of ListWashing?
>
>Having now read up on listwashing, yes it's feasible. Perhaps I should
>get some of my worst hit users to post here :-D
>
>
><<jdow>> At least one noted spammer seems to read this list or get
>at least indirect word about it. I taunted him on the list about his
>spams not quite reaching 100 points on small scores. Within a week I
>got some 100 point on small score spams. Then he got back to business
>instead of silliness. So did I.
>
>{^_^}
/me chuckles; that brings to mind poking rattlesnakes with sharp
pointy sticks; admittedly it'd be more fun poking the spammers with
sharp pointy sticks, but that's another sport entirely; it may even be
classed as public service or perhaps even pest control :-D
