100% spam free -- is this a good thing?

QNX Newsgroups (Archives) qdn.cafe
1

I just implemented a 100% spam free filter on parse.com, but had
one person who shall remain nameless (you know who you are :slight_smile:)
complain about it.

I’m therefore seeking opinions.

Basically, the description is at:

http://www.parse.com/aef/index.html

In summary, when you send an email, it bounces back to you, and
you have to click a URL which will put you in the whitelist database
and pass your email (and all subsequent emails) on to the recipient.

You are welcome to send me email at rk@parse.com to try it. :slight_smile:

Thoughts?

Cheers,
-RK

–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training, Consulting and Software Products at www.parse.com.

2

I like it. Can you post your source code and/or instructions
on how to set it up?
Frank

Robert Krten <rk@parse.com> wrote:

I just implemented a 100% spam free filter on parse.com, but had
one person who shall remain nameless (you know who you are > :slight_smile:> )
complain about it.

I’m therefore seeking opinions.

Basically, the description is at:

http://www.parse.com/aef/index.html

In summary, when you send an email, it bounces back to you, and
you have to click a URL which will put you in the whitelist database
and pass your email (and all subsequent emails) on to the recipient.

You are welcome to send me email at > rk@parse.com > to try it. > :slight_smile:

Thoughts?

Cheers,
-RK

–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training, Consulting and Software Products at > www.parse.com> .

3

liug <liug@mama.indstate.edu> wrote:

I like it. Can you post your source code and/or instructions
on how to set it up?
Frank

Right at this point, it’s kinda … fragile … in that it’s
very much oriented to my specific (small site) needs, doesn’t
have local user security (i.e., haven’t bothered too much about
permissions) etc.

If you still want a tarball, I can ship you one – just warning
you that it won’t just “install out of the box”.

Cheers,
-RK

Robert Krten <> rk@parse.com> > wrote:
I just implemented a 100% spam free filter on parse.com, but had
one person who shall remain nameless (you know who you are > :slight_smile:> )
complain about it.

I’m therefore seeking opinions.

Basically, the description is at:

http://www.parse.com/aef/index.html

In summary, when you send an email, it bounces back to you, and
you have to click a URL which will put you in the whitelist database
and pass your email (and all subsequent emails) on to the recipient.

You are welcome to send me email at > rk@parse.com > to try it. > :slight_smile:

Thoughts?

Cheers,
-RK

–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training, Consulting and Software Products at > www.parse.com> .

–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training, Consulting and Software Products at www.parse.com.

4

I just want to implement it on my own inbox, not the whole server.
Will that work?
Anyway, just send me the tar and I will get it work :slight_smile:
Thanks!
Frank

Robert Krten <rk@parse.com> wrote:

liug <> liug@mama.indstate.edu> > wrote:
I like it. Can you post your source code and/or instructions
on how to set it up?
Frank

Right at this point, it’s kinda … fragile … in that it’s
very much oriented to my specific (small site) needs, doesn’t
have local user security (i.e., haven’t bothered too much about
permissions) etc.

If you still want a tarball, I can ship you one – just warning
you that it won’t just “install out of the box”.

Cheers,
-RK

Robert Krten <> rk@parse.com> > wrote:
I just implemented a 100% spam free filter on parse.com, but had
one person who shall remain nameless (you know who you are > :slight_smile:> )
complain about it.

I’m therefore seeking opinions.

Basically, the description is at:

http://www.parse.com/aef/index.html

In summary, when you send an email, it bounces back to you, and
you have to click a URL which will put you in the whitelist database
and pass your email (and all subsequent emails) on to the recipient.

You are welcome to send me email at > rk@parse.com > to try it. > :slight_smile:

Thoughts?

Cheers,
-RK

–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training, Consulting and Software Products at > www.parse.com> .

–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training, Consulting and Software Products at > www.parse.com> .

5

Frank Liu <liug@mama.indstate.edu> wrote:

I just want to implement it on my own inbox, not the whole server.
Will that work?

Should. No guarantees :slight_smile:

Anyway, just send me the tar and I will get it work > :slight_smile:

Will do.

Cheers,
-RK

Thanks!
Frank

Robert Krten <> rk@parse.com> > wrote:
liug <> liug@mama.indstate.edu> > wrote:
I like it. Can you post your source code and/or instructions
on how to set it up?
Frank

Right at this point, it’s kinda … fragile … in that it’s
very much oriented to my specific (small site) needs, doesn’t
have local user security (i.e., haven’t bothered too much about
permissions) etc.

If you still want a tarball, I can ship you one – just warning
you that it won’t just “install out of the box”.

Cheers,
-RK

Robert Krten <> rk@parse.com> > wrote:
I just implemented a 100% spam free filter on parse.com, but had
one person who shall remain nameless (you know who you are > :slight_smile:> )
complain about it.

I’m therefore seeking opinions.

Basically, the description is at:

http://www.parse.com/aef/index.html

In summary, when you send an email, it bounces back to you, and
you have to click a URL which will put you in the whitelist database
and pass your email (and all subsequent emails) on to the recipient.

You are welcome to send me email at > rk@parse.com > to try it. > :slight_smile:

Thoughts?

Cheers,
-RK

–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training, Consulting and Software Products at > www.parse.com> .

–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training, Consulting and Software Products at > www.parse.com> .

–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training, Consulting and Software Products at www.parse.com.

6

Robert Krten <rk@parse.com> wrote:

I just implemented a 100% spam free filter on parse.com, but had
one person who shall remain nameless (you know who you are > :slight_smile:> )
complain about it.

Hi Robert

I read your AEF page. It sounds interesting. Spam is a pain in the
to everyone. I agree. But, considering you are trying to run a
business don’t you think that it’s going a little far? (Maybe you
don’t.) But if I were Joe Nobody and I wanted to hire you, I sent
you an e-mail and it got bumped back to me, I might not even bother
trying to register with your system. Then you just lost a potential
sale.

New thought: July 1st the feds are supposd to implement the national
“Do Not Call” list for telemarketers. If a telemarketer calls
someone on the list they can be fined $10,000O US. Of course I don’t
see any way to enforce this new law. But what they should do next
is to do the same thing for e-mail spammers.

7

“Robert Krten” <rk@parse.com> wrote in message
news:b5vb9j$rul$1@inn.qnx.com…

I just implemented a 100% spam free filter on parse.com, but had
one person who shall remain nameless (you know who you are > :slight_smile:> )
complain about it.

I’m therefore seeking opinions.

Basically, the description is at:

http://www.parse.com/aef/index.html

In summary, when you send an email, it bounces back to you, and
you have to click a URL which will put you in the whitelist database
and pass your email (and all subsequent emails) on to the recipient.

Sounds like a great idea to me! Would be glad to go through this extra step
to help out get rid of SPAM.



You are welcome to send me email at > rk@parse.com > to try it. > :slight_smile:

Thoughts?

Cheers,
-RK

–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training, Consulting and Software Products at > www.parse.com> .

8

Robert Krten <rk@parse.com> wrote:

I just implemented a 100% spam free filter on parse.com, but had
one person who shall remain nameless (you know who you are > :slight_smile:> )
complain about it.

I’m therefore seeking opinions.

Basically, the description is at:

http://www.parse.com/aef/index.html

In summary, when you send an email, it bounces back to you, and
you have to click a URL which will put you in the whitelist database
and pass your email (and all subsequent emails) on to the recipient.

So you’re in effect doubling mail traffic for your poor ISP? (hmmm, I
shouldn’t have sympathy for Rogers or Bell, but you see my point)

Plus, aren’t you validating yourself as an address to those spammers
that have one of those ‘reply to take yourself off the address’ systems?

And most of them aren’t going to receive your message since they are
bogus emails. Then you’re going to get bounced bounces, which you will
then start bouncing to the mailer-daemon@aol.com (which I HOPE you already
have on your whitelist! ;v)

–
cburgess@qnx.com

9

Colin Burgess <cburgess@qnx.com> wrote:

Robert Krten <> rk@parse.com> > wrote:
I just implemented a 100% spam free filter on parse.com, but had
one person who shall remain nameless (you know who you are > :slight_smile:> )
complain about it.

I’m therefore seeking opinions.

Basically, the description is at:

http://www.parse.com/aef/index.html

In summary, when you send an email, it bounces back to you, and
you have to click a URL which will put you in the whitelist database
and pass your email (and all subsequent emails) on to the recipient.

So you’re in effect doubling mail traffic for your poor ISP? (hmmm, I
shouldn’t have sympathy for Rogers or Bell, but you see my point)

No, not doubling. I don’t reply with the full content, just a quick
“hi, you’ve tried to send mail, click this URL” kind of thing…

Plus, aren’t you validating yourself as an address to those spammers
that have one of those ‘reply to take yourself off the address’ systems?

Like you say below, most are invalid.

And most of them aren’t going to receive your message since they are
bogus emails. Then you’re going to get bounced bounces, which you will
then start bouncing to the > mailer-daemon@aol.com > (which I HOPE you already
have on your whitelist! ;v)

Bounces go to a special address that takes the spool files out of the queue
immediately, instead of waiting for 30 days. :slight_smile:

Yes, the whitelist is filling up :slight_smile:

Cheers,
-RK

–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training, Consulting and Software Products at www.parse.com.

10

Good job! :v)

Robert Krten <rk@parse.com> wrote:

Colin Burgess <> cburgess@qnx.com> > wrote:
Robert Krten <> rk@parse.com> > wrote:
I just implemented a 100% spam free filter on parse.com, but had
one person who shall remain nameless (you know who you are > :slight_smile:> )
complain about it.

I’m therefore seeking opinions.

Basically, the description is at:

http://www.parse.com/aef/index.html

In summary, when you send an email, it bounces back to you, and
you have to click a URL which will put you in the whitelist database
and pass your email (and all subsequent emails) on to the recipient.

So you’re in effect doubling mail traffic for your poor ISP? (hmmm, I
shouldn’t have sympathy for Rogers or Bell, but you see my point)

No, not doubling. I don’t reply with the full content, just a quick
“hi, you’ve tried to send mail, click this URL” kind of thing…

Plus, aren’t you validating yourself as an address to those spammers
that have one of those ‘reply to take yourself off the address’ systems?

Like you say below, most are invalid.

And most of them aren’t going to receive your message since they are
bogus emails. Then you’re going to get bounced bounces, which you will
then start bouncing to the > mailer-daemon@aol.com > (which I HOPE you already
have on your whitelist! ;v)

Bounces go to a special address that takes the spool files out of the queue
immediately, instead of waiting for 30 days. > :slight_smile:

Yes, the whitelist is filling up > :slight_smile:

Cheers,
-RK

–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training, Consulting and Software Products at > www.parse.com> .

–
cburgess@qnx.com

11

This has nothing to do with the spam filter. This was a combination of
two things:
a) your ISP is aggressive in terms of timeouts – if a message
can’t be delivered in one day it gives up. The common
convention is FIVE days.

b) sendmail is flaky, and had wedged itself while I was out
of the country. Because it had wedged itself, your ISP
timed out.

Bummer.

Had it worked as expected, you would have immediately gotten a bounce
performed one click, and been scott free from then on.

To answer your question, we don’t deal with Amazon because they demand
an outrageous 55% discount, we have to pay shipping via a traceable
courier method, and they are also trying to squeeze additional funds on a yearly
basis out of small publishers.

QSSL carries the book as well if that helps …

Cheers,
-RK

John Nagle <nagle@downside.com> wrote:

Robert Krten wrote:
I just implemented a 100% spam free filter on parse.com, but had
one person who shall remain nameless (you know who you are > :slight_smile:> )
complain about it.

I’m therefore seeking opinions.

I needed to buy some more copies of your books,
and I couldn’t get through. See below for the message
that came back. This is not helpful.

John Nagle
Animats
650-326-9109

From - Tue Apr 08 04:52:58 2003
X-UIDL: 3e92b5d800000002
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 10000000
Return-Path: <> mailer-daemon@mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net
Received: (from bin@localhost)
by main6.ezpublishing.com (8.9.3p2/8.9.3) id EAA31232
for animats; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 04:35:15 -0700
Received: from mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net (mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net [151.164.30.28])
by main6.ezpublishing.com (8.9.3p2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA31179
for <> nagle@animats.com> >; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 04:35:09 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost)
by mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net (8.12.3 patch/8.12.3) id h37K64tu022680;
Tue, 8 Apr 2003 06:35:08 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 06:35:08 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <> MAILER-DAEMON@mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net
Message-Id: <> 200304081135.h37K64tu022680@mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net
To: <> nagle@animats.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status;
boundary=“h37K64tu022680.1049801708/mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net”
Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure)
Status:

This is a MIME-encapsulated message

–h37K64tu022680.1049801708/mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net

The original message was received at Sun, 6 Apr 2003 21:59:43 -0500 (CDT)
from adsl-64-166-225-230.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [64.166.225.230]

----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
rk@parse.com

----- Transcript of session follows -----
rk@parse.com> >… Deferred: Connection refused by parse.parse.com.
Message could not be delivered for 1 day
Message will be deleted from queue

–h37K64tu022680.1049801708/mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net
Content-Type: message/delivery-status

Reporting-MTA: dns; mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net
Arrival-Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 21:59:43 -0500 (CDT)

Final-Recipient: RFC822; > rk@parse.com
Action: failed
Status: 4.4.7
Remote-MTA: DNS; parse.parse.com
Last-Attempt-Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 06:35:08 -0500 (CDT)

–h37K64tu022680.1049801708/mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net
Content-Type: message/rfc822

Return-Path: <> nagle@animats.com
Received: from animats.com (adsl-64-166-225-230.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [64.166.225.230])
by mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net (8.12.3 patch/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h372xgXW015750;
Sun, 6 Apr 2003 21:59:43 -0500 (CDT)
Message-ID: <> 3E90EBE0.7080408@animats.com
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 20:09:20 -0700
From: John Nagle <> nagle@animats.com
Organization: Animats
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: > rk@parse.com
CC: John Nagle <> nagle@animats.com
Subject: Need more copies of “Getting Started with QNX Neutrino 2”
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I need three more copies. Please quote me a price.

Could you get this onto Amazon? It would simplify
ordering. Thanks.

John Nagle
Animats


–h37K64tu022680.1049801708/mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net–
\

–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training, Consulting and Software Products at www.parse.com.

12

Robert Krten wrote:

I just implemented a 100% spam free filter on parse.com, but had
one person who shall remain nameless (you know who you are > :slight_smile:> )
complain about it.

I’m therefore seeking opinions.

I needed to buy some more copies of your books,
and I couldn’t get through. See below for the message
that came back. This is not helpful.

John Nagle
Animats
650-326-9109

From - Tue Apr 08 04:52:58 2003
X-UIDL: 3e92b5d800000002
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 10000000
Return-Path: <> mailer-daemon@mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net
Received: (from bin@localhost)
by main6.ezpublishing.com (8.9.3p2/8.9.3) id EAA31232
for animats; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 04:35:15 -0700
Received: from mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net (mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net [151.164.30.28])
by main6.ezpublishing.com (8.9.3p2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA31179
for <> nagle@animats.com> >; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 04:35:09 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost)
by mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net (8.12.3 patch/8.12.3) id h37K64tu022680;
Tue, 8 Apr 2003 06:35:08 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 06:35:08 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <> MAILER-DAEMON@mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net
Message-Id: <> 200304081135.h37K64tu022680@mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net
To: <> nagle@animats.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status;
boundary=“h37K64tu022680.1049801708/mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net”
Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure)
Status:

This is a MIME-encapsulated message

–h37K64tu022680.1049801708/mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net

The original message was received at Sun, 6 Apr 2003 21:59:43 -0500 (CDT)
from adsl-64-166-225-230.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [64.166.225.230]

----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
rk@parse.com

----- Transcript of session follows -----
rk@parse.com> >… Deferred: Connection refused by parse.parse.com.
Message could not be delivered for 1 day
Message will be deleted from queue

–h37K64tu022680.1049801708/mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net
Content-Type: message/delivery-status

Reporting-MTA: dns; mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net
Arrival-Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 21:59:43 -0500 (CDT)

Final-Recipient: RFC822; > rk@parse.com
Action: failed
Status: 4.4.7
Remote-MTA: DNS; parse.parse.com
Last-Attempt-Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 06:35:08 -0500 (CDT)

–h37K64tu022680.1049801708/mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net
Content-Type: message/rfc822

Return-Path: <> nagle@animats.com
Received: from animats.com (adsl-64-166-225-230.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [64.166.225.230])
by mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net (8.12.3 patch/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h372xgXW015750;
Sun, 6 Apr 2003 21:59:43 -0500 (CDT)
Message-ID: <> 3E90EBE0.7080408@animats.com
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 20:09:20 -0700
From: John Nagle <> nagle@animats.com
Organization: Animats
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: > rk@parse.com
CC: John Nagle <> nagle@animats.com
Subject: Need more copies of “Getting Started with QNX Neutrino 2”
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I need three more copies. Please quote me a price.

Could you get this onto Amazon? It would simplify
ordering. Thanks.

John Nagle
Animats


–h37K64tu022680.1049801708/mta4.rcnstx.swbell.net–

13

I know this thread is long dead, but last night I read a little article
about a guy/company in Ottawa that is putting together a hunk of
software to do this same kind of thing, which leads to the problem.
This setup assumes that you can send an email to anyone who sends one to
you. What happens if the person on the remote end has the same kind of
setup? Unless you are carefull you end up with complete meltdown:

  1. Bob sends you an email
  2. You bounce back a verification email
  3. Bob bounces you back a varification email w.r.t. your verification.
  4. Go back to 2.

Now, anyone you send email to could be added to your white list, but if
the verification emails get a special reply to address to catch bounces
your still sol.

You probably avoid the email bombing if you kept track of all the email
addreses you have send out verification emails to, and only ever send
out 1 to each address, but then you still have the problem where no one
new that is using similar software can ever get ahold of you.

Just a couple thoughts…
-Peter

Robert Krten wrote:

I just implemented a 100% spam free filter on parse.com, but had
one person who shall remain nameless (you know who you are > :slight_smile:> )
complain about it.

I’m therefore seeking opinions.

Basically, the description is at:

http://www.parse.com/aef/index.html

In summary, when you send an email, it bounces back to you, and
you have to click a URL which will put you in the whitelist database
and pass your email (and all subsequent emails) on to the recipient.

You are welcome to send me email at > rk@parse.com > to try it. > :slight_smile:

Thoughts?

Cheers,
-RK

14

I hate spam too. (Even the e-mail kind.) But since I do consulting
I have to receive all e-mails.

July 1st (I think) the US national “Do Not Call” list goes into effect.
(Have you signed up?) Telemarkets calling a phone number on this list
can be fined up to $10,000. BTFOM how their going to enforce it. Who
defines a “Telemarketer”? If I make a call, “Hello Mrs. Jones. This is
Bill Caroselli from across the street. My daughter is selling Girl
Scout Cookies. Would you like some?” Boy am I in for it?

But assuming that someone can define telemarketer and figure out how to
enforce this law (which obviously remains to be seen) then why not just
extend it to a “Do Not E-mail List”. The US Government can eliminate
the national debt if they got 10 grand from every spammer!


Peter Graves <pgraves@qnx.com> wrote:
PG > I know this thread is long dead, but last night I read a little article
PG > about a guy/company in Ottawa that is putting together a hunk of
PG > software to do this same kind of thing, which leads to the problem.
PG > This setup assumes that you can send an email to anyone who sends one to
PG > you. What happens if the person on the remote end has the same kind of
PG > setup? Unless you are carefull you end up with complete meltdown:
PG > 1. Bob sends you an email
PG > 2. You bounce back a verification email
PG > 3. Bob bounces you back a varification email w.r.t. your verification.
PG > 4. Go back to 2.

PG > Now, anyone you send email to could be added to your white list, but if
PG > the verification emails get a special reply to address to catch bounces
PG > your still sol.

PG > You probably avoid the email bombing if you kept track of all the email
PG > addreses you have send out verification emails to, and only ever send
PG > out 1 to each address, but then you still have the problem where no one
PG > new that is using similar software can ever get ahold of you.

PG > Just a couple thoughts…
PG > -Peter

15

Bill Caroselli <qtps@earthlink.net> wrote:
BC > I hate spam too. (Even the e-mail kind.) But since I do consulting
BC > I have to receive all e-mails.

BC > July 1st (I think) the US national “Do Not Call” list goes into effect.
BC > (Have you signed up?) Telemarkets calling a phone number on this list
^^^^^^^^^^^
Telemarketers
BC > can be fined up to $10,000. BTFOM how their going to enforce it. Who
BC > defines a “Telemarketer”? If I make a call, “Hello Mrs. Jones. This is
BC > Bill Caroselli from across the street. My daughter is selling Girl
BC > Scout Cookies. Would you like some?” Boy am I in for it?

BC > But assuming that someone can define telemarketer and figure out how to
BC > enforce this law (which obviously remains to be seen) then why not just
BC > extend it to a “Do Not E-mail List”. The US Government can eliminate
BC > the national debt if they got 10 grand from every spammer!

16

But assuming that someone can define telemarketer and figure out how to
enforce this law (which obviously remains to be seen) then why not just
extend it to a “Do Not E-mail List”. The US Government can eliminate
the national debt if they got 10 grand from every spammer!

Because you just can’t figure out who they are…

I got a bounced email from the postmaster at AOL claiming that the email
I had tried to send to soandso@aol.com (advertising You Know What) had bounced.
I was a little perturbed to think that the 10 billion other people who
the email made it to now think of cburgess@qnx.com as just another bastard
spammer. :v(

So would I have the US Anti-Spam Squad on my doorstep? :v)

–
cburgess@qnx.com

17

Bill Caroselli <qtps@earthlink.net> wrote:

I hate spam too. (Even the e-mail kind.) But since I do consulting

And I hate spam three. My email address has been around for about 10
years and has probably propagated all over the Internet, and has probably
been dragged through the slime and the mud. My stupid mistake: I used to
be naive long time ago and use my real address in public newsgroups.
Furthermore my address is in people’s address-book and some of them are
stupid enough to send mail with a CC-list about a mile long, mine
included, and then some on that list might do something similar, and then,
etc, etc. sigh

Every day I keep adding more patterns to my .procmailrc to redirect trash
mail to /dev/null. (Haven’t gotten around to installing “spam-assassin” or
something similar like the product that the subject of this thread refers
to :slight_smile: And the more you filter, the more resilient they get.

And canceling my address isn’t an option, since all my contacts know me by
that address, and it’s also on my business cards, and it’s company
standard format, and our helpdesk (postmaster) would get tons of rejected
spam and, etc, etc.

Oh well… can I order a beer somewhere here?

regards,
rick

18

Doesn’t the receiving e-mail system record the IP address that the
e-mail was received from? If it’s a dial-up service provider then
they can/should be held responsible for knowing who is using their
system and when. (So be careful when giving that credit card info
to your ISP!)

Colin Burgess <cburgess@qnx.com> wrote:

But assuming that someone can define telemarketer and figure out how to
enforce this law (which obviously remains to be seen) then why not just
extend it to a “Do Not E-mail List”. The US Government can eliminate
the national debt if they got 10 grand from every spammer!

CB > Because you just can’t figure out who they are…

CB > I got a bounced email from the postmaster at AOL claiming that the email
CB > I had tried to send to soandso@aol.com (advertising You Know What) had bounced.
CB > I was a little perturbed to think that the 10 billion other people who
CB > the email made it to now think of cburgess@qnx.com as just another bastard
CB > spammer. :v(

CB > So would I have the US Anti-Spam Squad on my doorstep? :v)

CB > –
CB > cburgess@qnx.com

19

Rick Lake <rwlake@spamfree.domain.invalid> wrote:

Every day I keep adding more patterns to my .procmailrc to redirect trash
mail to /dev/null. (Haven’t gotten around to installing “spam-assassin” or
something similar like the product that the subject of this thread refers
to > :slight_smile: > And the more you filter, the more resilient they get.

since you talked about .procmailrc,
I’ve been using SpamBouncer (http://www.spambouncer.org/) and really
like it. It is a set of procmail recipes that fight spam. Better
than writing my own rules :slight_smile:

Frank

20

I’ll check it out. Thanks!

regards,
rick

fliu@mail.vipstage.com wrote:

Rick Lake <> rwlake@spamfree.domain.invalid> > wrote:
Every day I keep adding more patterns to my .procmailrc to redirect trash
mail to /dev/null. (Haven’t gotten around to installing “spam-assassin” or
something similar like the product that the subject of this thread refers
to > :slight_smile: > And the more you filter, the more resilient they get.

since you talked about .procmailrc,
I’ve been using SpamBouncer (> http://www.spambouncer.org/> ) and really
like it. It is a set of procmail recipes that fight spam. Better
than writing my own rules > :slight_smile:

Frank