On Apr 6, 2004, at 4:15 PM, Bill Neill wrote:
I understand your prob, so join us and demand THE NEILL SOLUTION, under your control, and it works. .
No, it doesn't work, not without a lot of disruption.
It's merely a form of opt-in control, where you have to keep track of and distribute new e-mail addresses to anyone who wishes to communicate to you.
It may work for you, but it certainly wouldn't work for Barbie, who depends on seeing new mail from old *and* new clients.
How is someone to learn her special e-mail code? Why, they send uncoded e-mail to her, where she *still* has to comb through her bushels of spam each and every day so she can avoid missing customers.
This is no different than the exclusion lists that many ISP's offer, where everyone not in your allowed list of people get shunted off to await approval, or worse, bounced.
Your solution merely adds several redundant layers of complexity to what should be a simple service.
Bayesian filters work and work well. My Mail.app junk filter catches all but a handful of the spams I receive daily.
Notifying my system that a mail is spam is a single click on the junk icon. As the spammers try new tricks I'll have to mark one, maybe two messages manually before the thing learns about that new twist, after that it's caught reliably.
Netscape works like this. Eudora works like this. Mozilla works like this. If you mail client doesn't work like this get a new mail client, or get SpamSieve.
In Barbie's case, the spam will be caught, but new customers won't, not unless they write like spammers (and if they do, does she really want their business?? ;-)
No one in my address book is filtered by this junk filter...put the LEM addresses in your address book and they'll never get caught.
The system is handled entirely on my client end, and no corporation is invading my privacy.
I have one e-mail address, and no weird division of my inbox. You claim you don't have to get a new e-mail address, but in fact, you do. You have as many different e-mail addresses as you have boxes. People have to add this code to e-mail you without being quarantined.
Moreover, your e-mail goes out as 'pcipmacinfo'. Under your scheme, anyone you deal with is going to have to manually change the e-mail address when they just hit 'reply'. That's absurd and gets real old, real quick.
We've all heard, multiple times of your wondrous 'solution'. It isn't so wondrous, and your missives promoting it are starting to appear like unexpected e-mails from deposed african dictators...
-- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group
Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs
-- PCI-PowerMacs is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/> and...
Small Dog Electronics http://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- Sonnet & PowerLogix Upgrades - start at $169 | & CDRWs on Sale! |
Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html>
PCI-PowerMacs list info: <http://lowendmac.com/lists/pci-powermacs.shtml> --> AOL users, remove "mailto:"; Send list messages to: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For digest mode, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subscription questions: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Archive:<http://www.mail-archive.com/pci-powermacs%40mail.maclaunch.com/>
Using a Mac? Free email & more at Applelinks! http://www.applelinks.com
