-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Apsey, [MA] wrote:
>> The era of 28k modems are over. Get on with it! I could not care less
>> if a message is 1 kb or 10 kb, or God forbid 1 Mb.
MA> If your logic continues, very soon even the present internet
MA> infrastructure will be inadeq
Hello Mike,
Friday, June 13, 2003, 1:40:52 PM, you wrote:
> Sorry Dave. I view dictionaries, as the late lexicographer David P.
> Guralnick said " Dictionaries are historical documents, recording
> where a language was at the time it went to print" (or words to that
> effect.
> The great Ambrose
> I have stated that while in general I do not like HTML email, but
> am willing to make specific exceptions. I have stated that for
> that reason, for my purposes I would consider a rejection of
> *all* HTML email as draconian. I have stated that classifying all
> HTML email as spam does not fit
> The era of 28k modems are over. Get on with it! I could not care less
> if a message is 1 kb or 10 kb, or God forbid 1 Mb.
If your logic continues, very soon even the present internet
infrastructure will be inadequate. I have a commercial broadband
account and am unafraid of a 200+ Megabyte dow
On Friday, June 13, 2003, 00:47:19, Joseph N. wrote:
> Any opinion about how either measures up to SpamPal?
My opinio is that they'll do a better job, universally. Spammers will
aways find open, still unidentified relays. When I'm not mistaken, SpamPal
only queries RBLs. Don't always trust RBLs! I
Hello Mike,
Friday, June 13, 2003, 12:32:49 PM, you wrote:
>> Nor are my uninformed/untrained family/friends sending me
>> unsolicited commercial email when they send me HTML emails.
> "Uninformed/untrained family/friends" are, or should be, trainable by
> a respected and experienced user.
You
On Friday, June 13, 2003, 00:50:17, Mark wrote:
> I want to understand EXACTLY how my mail is triaged and why,
> particularly on my critical accounts.
The programs I mentioned don't trash the mail, they mark it. What you do
with it afterwards is left up to you.
I use SpamAssassin on a mail server
Whilst I'm not a moderator of this list, may I remind the majority of you
who are chatting in this thread that this list is about an email program
called "The Bat!", and not Spam filtering, the internet and privacy, and
whatnot.
Thank you.
--
Best regards,
neurowerx (http://www.neurowerx.de)
I
MA>> To this author, e-mail is text; HTML belongs on the web; HTML in
MA>> e-mail is spam.
> No, it is not.
Fine. Those who created e-mail, and I was present for that, are
declared the losers, and those who want to send pretty flowers and
silly pink backgrounds with their e-mails (never mind tha
> While in general I agree with your sentiments about HTML "email",
> I do make exceptions for HTML newsletters, untrained
> family/friends, and the like. In my not-so-limited email
> experience I would agree that rejecting *all* HTML seems
> draconian. But if it works for you, so be it.
Agreed.
Hello Mike,
Friday, June 13, 2003, 11:49:12 AM, you wrote:
> To this author, e-mail is text; HTML belongs on the web; HTML in
> e-mail is spam.
> Read my lips: Not a thing draconian about that logic.
>> Anyway, that's my (limited) experience.
> As you say, your experience is "limited."
While
> The filtering system you presented, if I remember correctly, rejects
> all HTML email out of hand. This seems kinda draconian to me. I'll
> bet a lot of those rejections are false positives. POPFile actually
> reads the HTML and can correctly distinguish spam-HTML from
> non-spam-HTML.
To t
On Thu 12-Jun-03 5:17pm -0400, Mark wrote:
> MainSet: 40a.+,a.+,a.+,a.+,
> AltSet:1: 40a.+ , a.+ , a.+ ,a.+ ,
> AltSet:2: 40 AltSet:3: 40 AltSet:4: 40btinternet.+btinternet.+btinternet.+btinternet
> AltSet:5: 00From my testing, Recipient appears to, in effect, build a ToList and a
CcList. As I me
> *IMPORTANT* E-MAIL* let's see. Is that an oxymoron? Yes, it most
> certainly is in my household and after more than a decade of promoting
> it, encouraging people to use it, and trying to take it seriously, I
> have finally decided to step back and look at what it is, what isn't,
> what it has
> ##Go Mike!!## ;-).
Thank you Marck--not to be confused with the "Mark" to which I replied
somewhat pointedly yet politely earlier this morning.
I wish no-one harm and value my opportunities to express opinions as
fodder for balanced assessment in the virtual assembly of public
comment venues
MA>> Unfortunately, it is my sad yet considered opinion the choice to do
MA>> your own filtering is evaporating. My friend told me boastfully about
MA>> how his Iowa (USA) ISP was "Filtering" his mail with a bayesian
MA>> filter. I pointed him to a free bayesian filter he could operate
MA>> locall
Hello Joseph,
Thursday, June 12, 2003, 11:47:19 PM, you wrote:
JN> Any opinion about how either measures up to SpamPal?
And while we're here, has anyone had any experience of "SPAM CSI"
http://www.promailix.com/ ? I received a link from a colleague just
this morning.
It seems to offer a more pr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Mike,
@12-Jun-2003, 19:05 -0400 (00:05 UK time) Mike Apsey [MA] in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said
>> I want to understand EXACTLY how my mail is triaged and why,
>> particularly on my critical accounts.
MA> Unfortunately, it is my sad yet considered
> It's easy to get jaded when you do something for the common
> good with little or no return. Trust me, I know.
This is a busy list. Thanks for your comments. Jaded is indeed a good
word for what I was feeling at the time my reply was written. I would
add only that to work as designed, and after
On Thu 12-Jun-03 7:02pm -0400, Csaba Kiss wrote:
Csaba, you seem to be having a few macro problems. (1) The `Re:` in
your subject line is not separated from the real subject. (2) You
appear to be deleting the "In-Reply-To" line in the Kludges - this
destroys threading (you also have no "Refere
Good day to everyone,
You are going to laugh, but I signed up to this list just a day or two
ago in order to find out a few things about TB in order to perfect the
anti-spam mechnism that I just developed. Not really developed, just
added a few final touches to known techniques. The resulting thin
> Zero replies and zero comments on my earlier list post,
> which although posted in good spirit with a 3-hour compose
> time, was evidently a waste of time in the minds of the
> target audience, eh?
Not so fast Mike. Just because there wasn't a long thread
full of replies and opinions doesn't mea
> I want to understand EXACTLY how my mail is triaged and why,
> particularly on my critical accounts.
Unfortunately, it is my sad yet considered opinion the choice to do
your own filtering is evaporating. My friend told me boastfully about
how his Iowa (USA) ISP was "Filtering" his mail with a
Hi Mark,
On Thursday, June 12, 2003, 23:17:05, Mark wrote:
> Here is a regex spam filter folks might find useful
[...]
That is a good way to start, but there are more powerful spam filters.
SAProxy is a Windows incarnation of SpamAssassin, a very widely used and
thoroughly perfected spam filter w
24 matches
Mail list logo
