This is a test.
I'm testing spam blocking software called "Choice Mail Free"
Anyone else using it?
Chet
--------------------------------------------
My mailbox is spam-free with ChoiceMail, the leader in personal and corporate anti-spam solutions. Download your free copy of ChoiceMail from www.choicemailfree.com
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
I thought Ed was for a minute and it blocked everthing <g>
Allen
-----Original Message-----
From: profoxtech-bounces@leafe.com [mailto:profoxtech-bounces@leafe.com]
On Behalf Of Chet Gardiner
Sent: 27 October 2004 20:45
To: profoxtech@leafe.com
Subject: [NF] Testing Spam Blocker
This is a test.
I'm testing spam blocking software called "Choice Mail Free"
Anyone else using it?
Chet
It seems to be working well.
FYI, It's an opt-in system. When someone emails you they have to opt-in on
a web page. You then have the option to accept them in your whitelist or
not. I imported my address book and setup all of the email list names and
get those just fine. So far, so good...
C
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chet Gardiner" <chetdude@pacbell.net>
To: <profoxtech@leafe.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 12:44 PM
Subject: [NF] Testing Spam Blocker
This is a test.
I'm testing spam blocking software called "Choice Mail Free"
Anyone else using it?
Chet
--------------------------------------------
My mailbox is spam-free with ChoiceMail, the leader in personal and
corporate anti-spam solutions. Download your free copy of ChoiceMail from
www.choicemailfree.com
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
[excessive quoting removed by server]
I've used email since the beginning, and I fondly remember the days when
each and every email received was 'good' mail. Now, every day I have to
search a haystack for a possible needle. The situation is out of control and
demands a solution.
I firmly believe that the solution to the problem is legislation and
enforcement at the ISP level using a (sophisticated) no-spam list mechanic.
By 'sophisticated', I mean giving users the ability to customize their
definition of spam, e.g. someone who wants spam about mortgages could add
the keyword 'mortgages' to their 'okay' list. And, of course, it would have
to be worldwide.
A less acceptable approach would be a postage stamp-like charge for email,
which of course the ISP's would love, but (a) wouldn't stop spam, and (b)
would make Internet usage unnecessarily more costly for everyone. Not a good
solution.
The opt-in approach (which we don't need a vendor for, we can just using
email filtering) will stop, for example, an effort by a long lost friend to
contact you, among many other unhelpful scenarios. I consider this the least
desirable solution, yet it very much appears to be the direction of the day.
Bill
> It seems to be working well.
>
> FYI, It's an opt-in system. When someone emails you they
> have to opt-in on a web page. You then have the option to
> accept them in your whitelist or not. I imported my address
> book and setup all of the email list names and get those just
> fine. So far, so good...
>
> C
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 16:27:25 -0400, Bill Arnold <bill@wjarnold.com> wrote:
> I firmly believe that the solution to the problem is legislation and
> enforcement at the ISP level using a (sophisticated) no-spam list mechanic.
> By 'sophisticated', I mean giving users the ability to customize their
> definition of spam, e.g. someone who wants spam about mortgages could add
> the keyword 'mortgages' to their 'okay' list.
So, basically, Bayesian filtering, yes?
Unfortunately, no. I've been using Spambeyes for a while now, and it's
obvious the spammers are onto it, because they include title lines and
wording that closely mimic anything a friend would say. Therefore, spambeyes
filtering is causing more and more friendly mail to get thrown into the spam
bucket, which means we have to go through the spam bucket with a close eye,
which gets us back to step 1.
Bill
> > I firmly believe that the solution to the problem is legislation and
> > enforcement at the ISP level using a (sophisticated) no-spam list
> > mechanic. By 'sophisticated', I mean giving users the ability to
> > customize their definition of spam, e.g. someone who wants
> spam about
> > mortgages could add the keyword 'mortgages' to their 'okay' list.
>
> So, basically, Bayesian filtering, yes?
That's funny you say that.... ever since Ed turned me onto it it's just
gotten better and better at picking out the crap... when in doubt it throws
it in the "Junk Suspects" folder I have set up, and even then about 90% of
those are actual spam anyway.
Never had it fail me yet (that I know of) with a false positive into the
Spam folder (which gets a quick emptying every couple of days)...
Matt Jarvis
Programmer Guy
Northwest Direct
Eugene, Oregon USA
> -----Original Message-----
> From: profoxtech-bounces@leafe.com
> [mailto:profoxtech-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Bill Arnold
> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 3:42 PM
>
> Unfortunately, no. I've been using Spambeyes for a while now,
> and it's obvious the spammers are onto it, because they
> include title lines and wording that closely mimic anything a
> friend would say. Therefore, spambeyes filtering is causing
> more and more friendly mail to get thrown into the spam
> bucket, which means we have to go through the spam bucket
> with a close eye, which gets us back to step 1.
>
>
> Bill
>
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:42:23 -0400, Bill Arnold <bill@wjarnold.com> wrote:
> Unfortunately, no. I've been using Spambeyes for a while now, and it's
> obvious the spammers are onto it, because they include title lines and
> wording that closely mimic anything a friend would say. Therefore, spambeyes
> filtering is causing more and more friendly mail to get thrown into the spam
> bucket, which means we have to go through the spam bucket with a close eye,
> which gets us back to step 1.
Well, I'm using SpamAssassin on my Nyx account, with Bayesian turned
on, and it's rare that anything gets marked as spam that I actually
want.
One notable exception, though: Camwyn's beta fiction never gets
through to me. It gets chucked straight into the bit bucket, without
even giving me a chance to look at it first.
You are training SpamBayes that the ham messages are non-spam, right?
On Oct 28, 2004, at 6:51 PM, Matt Jarvis wrote:
> That's funny you say that.... ever since Ed turned me onto it it's just
> gotten better and better at picking out the crap... when in doubt it
> throws
> it in the "Junk Suspects" folder I have set up, and even then about
> 90% of
> those are actual spam anyway.
A few do get through - probably less than 10 a week. In that same
time, it typically blocks 100-200 spams. All in all, not too shabby.
___/
/
__/
/
____/
Ed Leafe
Hi Garrett/Matt,
But my point is that since Spambeyes results cannot be 100% perfect, one
must search the pile every day for 'nuggets', and the pile continues to get
bigger with each passing month with no end in sight, as more and more people
take advantage of free advertising.
Note that I probably get more than the usual amount of spam in the 1st place
because I have 3 email ID's (for real reasons), and one of goes back to the
beginning of the net. It's on a ton of spam lists, somehow.
I've been reading lately about Bill Gate's commitment to stop it, but from
what I've seen so far, his solution involves proprietary code, so it's being
resisted as a standard (even though he's offering licenses for free ...
now).
Let's hope the loggerjam is unraveled soon enough, because we know it can be
(and BG confirms it too), it just takes the right actions in the right
places. An MS proprietary solution isn't the answer, but there does seem to
be a committee working on it, and hopefully they will prevail. I think that
the ISP level is a great place to focus on, and if SP3 finally fixes Windows
exposures, then we ought to be back on track with the Internet being the
greatest invention of all time.
Bill
> Well, I'm using SpamAssassin on my Nyx account, with Bayesian
> turned on, and it's rare that anything gets marked as spam
> that I actually want.
>
> One notable exception, though: Camwyn's beta fiction never
> gets through to me. It gets chucked straight into the bit
> bucket, without even giving me a chance to look at it first.
>
> You are training SpamBayes that the ham messages are non-spam, right?
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]