To people who complain about my replying to spam.

  • Thread starter Thread starter John Corliss
  • Start date Start date
J

John Corliss

Supernews does a fairly good job of filtering spam out of usenet, and
they're my newsfeed. If I see the spam, then in all likelihood, many
others will as well and so the spam needs to be dealt with. Usually such
spam isn't cross-posted (i.e. is posted in individual messages to
several groups) and thus, slips past the filters.

The reason I post my replies to such spam is to provide abuse addresses
for others to use if they see the spam as well and also want to file a
complaint. The more complaints that are filed against a spammer, the
more likely it is that:

1. their website will be shut down
2. their email account will be closed
3. spam will stop coming from them.

If you don't like my replies, you should set up a message filter in your
news reader to delete messages with:

*SPAM*

in the subject line. The inclusion of that character string in such
replies was long ago agreed upon by this group for exactly that purpose.

Or of course, if you like, filter out my messages altogether.

If you need any help figuring out how to do either, then simply ask and
somebody will help you.

If you don't want to set up such filters, then you have nobody but
yourself to blame for having to read all my messages.

I'm not going to change my behavior, so deal with it.
 
The reason I post my replies to such spam is to provide abuse addresses
for others to use if they see the spam as well and also want to file a
complaint. The more complaints that are filed against a spammer, the
more likely it is that:

1. their website will be shut down
2. their email account will be closed
3. spam will stop coming from them.
Click to expand...

I'm not complaining about your anti-spam methods but I would like to
point out that it's a waste of time. Most spam is constructed with
fake headers. Abuse addresses may be correct but the majority will be
ignored because hosting companies know that spammers just move on.
Spam won't stop being sent so your only option is make sure it is sent
in the wrong direction. Use a redirected real address rather than a
fake one and most of your spam will never arrive. Note that I am
posting this message with a real address but I don't get much spam at
all.
 
(e-mail address removed), 7/27/2006, 7:55:13 AM,
Use a redirected real address rather than a
fake one and most of your spam will never arrive.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by this?
 
(e-mail address removed), 7/27/2006, 7:55:13 AM,


What do you mean by this?
Click to expand...

It's quite simple. I have six real email addresses which are all
redirected to the one I'm using here which is also a real address.
They are sorted out by Agent watch filters into different folders. The
address I'm using here as been in use for over twelve years and so is
probably on every spam list. Anything sent directly to the address
rather than via a redirection is not downloaded and the server deletes
it.
 
(e-mail address removed), 7/27/2006, 7:55:13 AM,


What do you mean by this?
Click to expand...

What I get from it is that Steve is talking about email spam, John is
talking about usenet spam... two entirely different animals IMO.
 
so you still get your spam?


It's quite simple. I have six real email addresses which are all
redirected to the one I'm using here which is also a real address.
They are sorted out by Agent watch filters into different folders. The
address I'm using here as been in use for over twelve years and so is
probably on every spam list. Anything sent directly to the address
rather than via a redirection is not downloaded and the server deletes
it.

--
Steve Wolstenholme Neural Planner Software

EasyNN-plus. The easy way to build neural networks.
http://www.easynn.com
Click to expand...
 
What I get from it is that Steve is talking about email spam, John is
talking about usenet spam... two entirely different animals IMO.
Click to expand...

I think John was talking about both. One of his points was to close
the spammer email account.
 
OK, dingleberry. If I see someone pounding their head against a wall I
won't try to stop them. You have the right to be as brain damaged as
you want to be.

You, of all people, have certainly availed yourself of that right.
 
(e-mail address removed) wrote in
I think John was talking about both. One of his points was to close
the spammer email account.
Click to expand...

Hi Steve,

The usual action by an ISP is that an account is terminated because of
violating the ToS; by closing the account the email address goes with it.
In case a spammer used a different email account, the email account still
could be terminated if the spam was not send by email but was posted on
usenet.

I think John may want to hurt a spammer real badly, therefore using all
means to do so...
 
(e-mail address removed) wrote in


Hi Steve,

The usual action by an ISP is that an account is terminated because of
violating the ToS; by closing the account the email address goes with it.
In case a spammer used a different email account, the email account still
could be terminated if the spam was not send by email but was posted on
usenet.
Click to expand...

Yes, but most ISP just close down a token few so they can claim to be
anti spam.
I think John may want to hurt a spammer real badly, therefore using all
means to do so...
Click to expand...

True, but like I said before it doesn't help much at all. In fact some
ISP refuse to act because they leave themselves open to legal action.
 
Mark said:
Wouldn't self-promotion be considered *SPAM* as well?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure your quote from John's post would be considered
"self-promotion." <grin>

Fwiw, I appreciate John's *SPAM* posts. I'm glad /someone/ is reporting
the spam. Once in a great while, I'll even use what John's posted to
add my own complaint. Over the years, when I've emailed complaints,
I've gotten replies and results. Not often, but often enough to know
it's not a complete waste of time.

I consider John's *SPAM* posts to be a service. In the eyes of some, it
may be irritating to see these posts but <shrug>. Kill-files were
invented to manage irritants.

-Craig
 
I consider John's *SPAM* posts to be a service.

So now Corliss is Batman and you are his sidekick supporter Robbin?

Dynamic duo.... hitting spam where it hurts...

MEN IN TIGHTS! HA!
 
The reason I post my replies to such spam is to provide abuse
addresses for others to use if they see the spam as well and also
want to file a complaint.
Click to expand...

People who can't tell from the spam itself where to send abuse reports
shouldn't rely on your replies, though. This makes your replies to the
spam useless noise, and useless noise is why we don't like spam in the
first place.
 
»Q« said:
People who can't tell from the spam itself where to send abuse reports
shouldn't rely on your replies, though.
Click to expand...

John's providing a service:

- marking a post spam
- identifying spam's originating host

I know how to source spam but often, in acf, I don't bother. The value
in John's service is that he's done the work for me. I really don't see
a problem w/what John is providing other than the "annoyance issue," and
that can be filtered by the offended, no?

fwiw,
-Craig
 
Back
Top