Andrew Sackville-West writes:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 01:05:39PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
>>
>> The other thing I've noticed is that a new spam will have a subject
>> starting with Re: . Could not the list filter verify that the subject
>> Re'd actually exists in the list archive within a s
> Douglas Tutty wrote:
> >Since the spam doesn't seem to be targeted specifically to *N*X system
> >users, it may be safe to think that their targeted audience mostly is
> >running *doze. Sind *doze people can't handle .ps files easily there's
> >less incentive for the spammers to send .ps files.
Douglas Tutty wrote:
..
Since the spam doesn't seem to be targeted specifically to *N*X system
users, it may be safe to think that their targeted audience mostly is
running *doze. Sind *doze people can't handle .ps files easily there's
less incentive for the spammers to send .ps files.
So the
On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 12:59:50PM +, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 15:15:46 -0600
> Mike McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello Mike,
>
> > > Another option would be to put the image on the web somewhere, and
> > > post a link to it in the relevant query message.
> > That's
On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 15:15:46 -0600
Mike McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Mike,
> > Another option would be to put the image on the web somewhere, and
> > post a link to it in the relevant query message.
> That's one way of "receiving such information separately off list".
Yes, indeed it
Brad Rogers wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 14:25:34 -0600
Mike McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Mike,
Respectfully, I would very much prefer not to see images posted to the
list, under any circumstances. If there is a problem such as you
mentioned, then those who wish to respond to the is
On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 14:25:34 -0600
Mike McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Mike,
> Respectfully, I would very much prefer not to see images posted to the
> list, under any circumstances. If there is a problem such as you
> mentioned, then those who wish to respond to the issue should receiv
Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
That is not a solution. Spammers can always use .ps files to send their spam.
Besides not every email containing a graphic image is spam. For example, one
might be attaching a .jpg screenshot with a font problem he is having on his
computer.
Respectfully, I would
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 10:16:11AM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 01:05:39PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
> >
> > The other thing I've noticed is that a new spam will have a subject
> > starting with Re: . Could not the list filter verify that the subject
> > Re'd ac
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 01:05:39PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
The other thing I've noticed is that a new spam will have a subject
starting with Re: . Could not the list filter verify that the subject
Re'd actually exists in the list archive within a set time fra
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 01:05:39PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
>
> The other thing I've noticed is that a new spam will have a subject
> starting with Re: . Could not the list filter verify that the subject
> Re'd actually exists in the list archive within a set time frame (30
> days?).
but then
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 12:09:19PM -0500, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> On Thursday 04 January 2007 11:30, Douglas Tutty wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 09:32:01AM +, Jon Dowland wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 11:06:54PM +, Gary Roach wrote:
> > > > Check out a couple of not so on t
On Thursday 04 January 2007 11:30, Douglas Tutty wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 09:32:01AM +, Jon Dowland wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 11:06:54PM +, Gary Roach wrote:
> > > Check out a couple of not so on topic entries.
>
> It seems to me that much of this spam includes graphic imag
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 09:32:01AM +, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 11:06:54PM +, Gary Roach wrote:
> > Check out a couple of not so on topic entries.
>
It seems to me that much of this spam includes graphic images
(presumably that contain ads but I don't open them). Could
On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 11:06:54PM +, Gary Roach wrote:
> Check out a couple of not so on topic entries.
Please refrain from replying to spams on-list, and
especially quoting context from them. This only serves to
make statistical-classification filters less reliable.
--
Jon Dowland
--
T
Exactly right. I never thought I'd get this sort of thing in a Linux group!
--Steve Mazurek
On 1/3/07, Gary Roach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Check out a couple of not so on topic entries.
exacting Schooolgirls doinng splendiferous suckiing. susan 12/30/2006
2:00PM
and
YOUR INHERITANCE
Check out a couple of not so on topic entries.
exacting Schooolgirls doinng splendiferous suckiing. susan 12/30/2006
2:00PM
and
YOUR INHERITANCE FUNDS OF $15.5MMike Dana Will 01/02/2007 4:30AM
Im not exactly a prude but it does clutter up the group. The advertising
just drives
17 matches
Mail list logo
