From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/40041 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stainless Steel Rat Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: thoughts on spam Date: 05 Nov 2001 15:38:34 -0500 Organization: The Happy Fun Ball Brigade Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <87y9m9fs6b.fsf@squeaker.lickey.com> <87elo1exsd.fsf@squeaker.lickey.com> <20011102160930.CC3D1BD52@squeaker.lickey.com> <87wv192jzh.fsf_-_@mclinux.com> <861yjgbygz.fsf@duchess.twilley.org> <20011102235444.E9C73BD48@squeaker.lickey.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035175654 31149 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 04:47:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 04:47:34 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: (qmail 25398 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 20:39:51 -0000 Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu (mail@129.7.128.13) by mastaler.com with SMTP; 5 Nov 2001 20:39:51 -0000 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 160qWV-0007PH-00; Mon, 05 Nov 2001 14:39:11 -0600 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Mon, 05 Nov 2001 14:38:52 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (qmailr@sclp3.sclp.com [209.196.61.66]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA14172 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 14:38:34 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (qmail 25346 invoked by alias); 5 Nov 2001 20:38:38 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 25340 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 20:38:38 -0000 Original-Received: from h0060978d8c91.ne.mediaone.net (HELO peorth.gweep.net) (evldat@24.218.202.161) by gnus.org with SMTP; 5 Nov 2001 20:38:38 -0000 Original-Received: (from ratinox@localhost) by peorth.gweep.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id fA5KcYc10969; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 15:38:34 -0500 Original-To: "(ding)" X-Attribution: Rat In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 61 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:40041 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:40041 * "Jason R. Mastaler" on Mon, 05 Nov 2001 | I think you are underestimating the intelligence of the average e-mail | user. Confirming a message through TMDA requires less effort than | subscribing to a mailing list, and some of the least technical people | imaginable (my landlord, my aunt, etc.) were not confused by the process. No, I'm not. I honestly wish I were, but I get two or three stupid user questions a week about mail that you would think is totally self-explanatory. I get mail from users, sometimes the -same- users, asking about mail that tells them that they don't have to do anything at all. | Also, e-mail awareness/competence will continue to increase as time | goes on making this less and less of an issue. Call me a pessimist, then. [...] | In practice, this isn't the case. TMDA allows you to save a copy of | the confirmed message before storing it for confirmation, so you can | check for these cases if you want, but I've found it isn't necessary. Ummm... I am confused. What confirmed message? If you the user hasn't confirmed anything then you don't get a confirmed message to sort or store. Maybe I'm missing something here? [...] | So be it. If you are too lazy to reply to a one-time confirmation | message, it tells me your message probably isn't worth reading. Actually, it tells you nothing at all. See, that is my point. You, the TDMA user, never know this has happened. | And the confirmation is for a good cause, it doesn't indicate a | "brain-damaged mail system". In my rather extreme opinion, anything that knowingly interferes with the delivery of legitimate mail without informing the recipient of that interference is brain-damaged. | > The RISK here is that you will never know that this has happened. | Again, this isn't true. You can save the message before confirming as | I mentioned, scan the pending queue periodically, etc. Sounds a bit backwards to me. Knowing that I got bad mail and dealing with it makes more sense to me than scanning a trap full of bad mail for one or two good messages that may or may not be there. [...] | Updated yes, but after the fact. This strategy is old-hat and simply | doesn't work well enough for my tastes. Use what makes you most | comfortable. Enough said. You'd be suprised at how well it can work. The trick is to use a scoring method, grepping for words and phrases common to various types of spam and setting the spam flag if the score exceeds a threshold. This works because most of the spam out there are basically form letters. -- Rat \ Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ PGP Key: at a key server near you! \