> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Gianni Mariani > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 9:06 AM ... > So what did we decide to do ? > > I can't stand it any longer. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > | spam
I apologize for adding to the "SPAM", but I second the motion for action. There was a mention of someone hosting the list, but not managing it, other then implementing automatic SPAM control mechanisms. I'd say - That's A LOT better than what's in place now! Someelse suggested a Yahoo forum, but a counterargument was made that that would be like AOL's SPAM control concept -- You'll ONLY RECEIVE the TONS of obnoxious adverts AOL puts out! Errh, Yahoo. At the moment, I filter via Microsoft Outlook's "Rules Wizard". Every so often SPAM seeps through - so I complain to the sender's ISP and anyone else up the food chain I can detect from the SPAM header and body, though a lot has already been erased by the mailing list processor. The effective SPAMMER's have already concealed themselves well with forged headers directing you to innocent bystanders. So, I add another rule and live content that I've killed another SPAM stream. BTW, I've shut-out 163.com, 263.com and a lot of .cn domains, but I've noticed that about 1-5% seem to be legitimate CVS maillist subscribers. So, I don't see their questions, but it's FAR PREFERABLE to getting SPAM from their domain! Also, I've noticed the CVS maillist sometimes includes "Open Relay" and "Black-Holed" info in the header from the ORBDB SPAM filter, but I guess that's just advisory! I.e., a server took the trouble to bounce the message sender server's IP address, detected a SPAMMER, but forwarded the SPAM anyones. Why not FILTER ALL SUSPECT SPAM and just let the sender figure out that his ISP is irresponsible (or making money by stealing bandwidth - directly or indirectly). Thanks & Regards, Art _______________________________________________ Bug-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-cvs
