Diane Poremsky said:One man's idea of spam is another man's idea of good mail, so letting 50% of
the users decide it's spam (especially if only a few report it) is a bad
idea. Better is to enable spam scanning on the server side - this gets rid
of all the real spam such as the junk currently going around with subjects
such as '[sender] wrote:' My mail server uses ORFEE from vamsoft.com and it
gets rid of a ton of this crap.
Henrik14 said:Mr. Schmidt, I also have new Outlook but there is nothing like You
describe
there!
I got this "Junk Mail" option mentioned before, but I was never able to
find
it......
I also recommended to MS to start hiring professionall programmers to make
their operating systems, but then there would be no bugs and things would
be
working perfectly, so what would MS sell as new OS to users :-((
Spam mali would be fast finished if user can block unwanted mail, and all
is
necesary is to block mails with same hyperlinks that unwanted mail is
driving
users to read, dont You think? I am professionall programmer and I can do
it,
but You know what? Nobody would let me do it, because then webmasters
would
not earn money on spam and pornography
I can also make inteligent routine for recognition of words that spamers
use, which would not be confused by extra spaces or speciall characters
spamers put in to fool spam filters.......
Also, there should be central database of blocked emails, and when 51% of
users decide to block something, then this WEB page or even server should
be
shut down permanently! Antivirus control should also be put on servers, to
stop sending
viruses, so then there would be no possibility that another computer would
be infected, is that not so?
All the best from Marijan Pollak!
But, as long as MS is leting hackers to find weak spots in their programs
instead of making sure such dont exist in first place, we would all
suffer!
Henrik14 said:Honored Mrs./Miss Poremsky,
It is true what You say, but anybody can find what he/she like by
searching
WEB,
so mayority need not suffer unwanted mail because there are few who would
like it, dont You think? If I dont like advertisement, I would not read
it,
and those people are hanging it on our nose! Worst is, not only those are
99%
things that I even CANNOT get if I would want to, and of remaining 1% more
than half would just take money and dont deliver (and keep sending me same
offers!) or I would get some placebo pills or worthless merchandise in
best
case!
If they advertise from registered domain and traceable site, then one can
more easy check if this is just bogus company or real factory and product,
no?
The way it is, I am blocking hundred or more spam senders per day as
99.99%
of mail I receive is something I am not interested in! Thanks to
ineffectiveness of Microsoft software, I cannot even block multiple
senders,
and obviously there must be sequentiall comparation with allready blocked
senders going on, as I need nearly a minute to block single sender, which
say
that MS is hiring amateurs that know but little about programming, but
have
succesfully hacked their OS, which is not hard to da considering what pile
of
slaped up horror code it is!
And for percentage of users that would be deciding in case of stoping some
kind of mail permanently, would it be 70%, 80% or 99%, at some point
mayority
has to have means to fight back those asaults on our privacy, at least I
believe so!
Dont You?
Have anybody calculated volume of spam mail that choke bandwith daily?
All the best from Zagreb, the capitol of Croatia, Europe!
Marijan Pollak
IT Systems Engineer 1st Class, Instructor and Team Leader
-in retirement-
Diane Poremsky said:One man's idea of spam is another man's idea of good mail, so letting 50%
of
the users decide it's spam (especially if only a few report it) is a bad
idea. Better is to enable spam scanning on the server side - this gets
rid
of all the real spam such as the junk currently going around with
subjects
such as '[sender] wrote:' My mail server uses ORFEE from vamsoft.com and
it
gets rid of a ton of this crap.
Henrik14 said:Mr. Schmidt, I also have new Outlook but there is nothing like You
describe
there!
I got this "Junk Mail" option mentioned before, but I was never able to
find
it......
I also recommended to MS to start hiring professionall programmers to
make
their operating systems, but then there would be no bugs and things
would
be
working perfectly, so what would MS sell as new OS to users :-((
Spam mali would be fast finished if user can block unwanted mail, and
all
is
necesary is to block mails with same hyperlinks that unwanted mail is
driving
users to read, dont You think? I am professionall programmer and I can
do
it,
but You know what? Nobody would let me do it, because then webmasters
would
not earn money on spam and pornography
I can also make inteligent routine for recognition of words that
spamers
use, which would not be confused by extra spaces or speciall characters
spamers put in to fool spam filters.......
Also, there should be central database of blocked emails, and when 51%
of
users decide to block something, then this WEB page or even server
should
be
shut down permanently! Antivirus control should also be put on servers,
to
stop sending
viruses, so then there would be no possibility that another computer
would
be infected, is that not so?
All the best from Marijan Pollak!
But, as long as MS is leting hackers to find weak spots in their
programs
instead of making sure such dont exist in first place, we would all
suffer!
:
Hi Chuck,
Go into Tools, Options, Junk Email and switch your junk email filter
off. Then close and reopen Outlook and switch the junk email filter
back
on.
Any improvement?
Patrick Schmid
--------------
http://pschmid.net
On my initial upgrade to 2003 to 2007 I recieved over 300 spam
emails.
I can
only assume that Outlook 2003 was blocking them and 2007 is not.
Why
is
that? Has anyone experienced similar problems?