For all of you adding SPAM replies to spam messages...

NEWSFLASH:

Usenet spam is posted by bots. Spammers do not monitor their messages in
newsgroups. You do not "clear up the newsgroup", you duplicate the
spam-related post count. You also create more trash that escapes the
filters of people who already know how to filter this spam.

Think of it like an automated sales/ad phone call. You achieve nothing by
yelling and cursing at the phone. The person who set up the autodialer
does not care. All you get for your trouble is a sore throat for screaming
and pissed off neighbors who don't appreciate you yelling at the top of
your lungs every time you get hit with an automated ad call.

You don't want to see spam? Here's the deal: get a proper usenet server
and use a proper usenet client. I recommend Mozilla Thunderbird, it's easy
to use and set up, and it has very nice filtering capabilities that are
very useful for filtering unwanted messages. You could not only be rid of
the usual spammers that hawk watches/shoes/handbags/whatever, you could
also, say, block Hazelwood's tirades, ignore threads that have "KNIFE!" or
"7543" in the subject, and so on. Tell you what, switch to Thunderbird and
I'll gladly post instructions for setting up filters that will kill the
spam.

I like the SPAM subject line, it's short and clear instead of two or three
lines about every rusty replica watch or that guy on drugs that wakes up
every week or ten days to post weird things.

On 30 Apr 2008 16:49:51 GMT, Javier Gonzalez wrote:

> You don't want to see spam? Here's the deal: get a proper usenet
> server and use a proper usenet client. I recommend Mozilla
> Thunderbird, it's easy to use and set up, and it has very nice
> filtering capabilities that are very useful for filtering unwanted
> messages.

Written, of course, by somebody using Xnews. :-)

As for a good server, I use <http://news.motzarella.org/>

> You could not only be rid of the usual spammers that hawk
> watches/shoes/handbags/whatever, you could also, say, block
> Hazelwood's tirades, ignore threads that have "KNIFE!" or "7543" in
> the subject, and so on. Tell you what, switch to Thunderbird and I'll
> gladly post instructions for setting up filters that will kill the
> spam.

I'll go further and recommend the Usenet Improvement Project
<http://improve-usenet.org>, which has information about blocking Google
Groups posts entirely -- the source of the vast majority of the spam, as
well as IMO a lot of the structurally bad posts (things like bad
quoting, "replying" to the most recent post in a thread when the reply
really ought to be to a post earlier in the thread -- Usenet isn't a
web-forum -- mal-formed links, and the like). However, the information
about GG filters is a good jumping off point for learning about more
advanced filtering.

--
Ted Schuerzinger
tedstennis at myrealbox dot com
If you're afraid of the ball, don't sit in the front row. --Anastasia
Rodionova

On Apr 30, 3:12*pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> I like the SPAM subject line, it's short and clear instead of two or three
> lines about every rusty replica watch or that guy on drugs that wakes up
> every week or ten days to post weird things.

I see.

Time to add "^SPAM$" to the filters then... *sigh*.

"wkhedr" <wkhedr@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:v5mdnV_2FJgSWYXVnZ2dnUVZ_tOtnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>I like the SPAM subject line, it's short and clear instead of two or three
>lines about every rusty replica watch or that guy on drugs that wakes up
>every week or ten days to post weird things.

To what end? Either way, it's completely clear that it's spam.

Ted S. wrote:
> On 30 Apr 2008 16:49:51 GMT, Javier Gonzalez wrote:
>
>> You don't want to see spam? Here's the deal: get a proper usenet
>> server and use a proper usenet client. I recommend Mozilla
>> Thunderbird, it's easy to use and set up, and it has very nice
>> filtering capabilities that are very useful for filtering unwanted
>> messages.
>
> Written, of course, by somebody using Xnews. :-)

I have Xnews, but there must be some secret to it because I can't seem to use it
with anything other than great difficulty. The fact that I still use Outlook
Express when I could be using Xnews is an indication of where I am with it.

> As for a good server, I use <http://news.motzarella.org/>
>
>> You could not only be rid of the usual spammers that hawk
>> watches/shoes/handbags/whatever, you could also, say, block
>> Hazelwood's tirades, ignore threads that have "KNIFE!" or "7543" in
>> the subject, and so on. Tell you what, switch to Thunderbird and I'll
>> gladly post instructions for setting up filters that will kill the
>> spam.
>
> I'll go further and recommend the Usenet Improvement Project
> <http://improve-usenet.org>, which has information about blocking
> Google Groups posts entirely

That's pretty drastic, considering the number of non-spammers who also use it.

Javier Gonzalez wrote:
> you could also, say, block ...."7543" in the subject,

Bad example isn't it?

On Apr 30, 7:41*pm, "DavidW" <n...@email.provided> wrote:
> Javier Gonzalez wrote:
> > you could also, say, block ...."7543" in the subject,
>
> Bad example isn't it?

Au contraire, an excellent example - threads with "7543" in the
subject usually degenerate into mindless drivel faster than the
average thread in RST.

On Apr 30, 7:39*pm, "DavidW" <n...@email.provided> wrote:
> I have Xnews, but there must be some secret to it because I can't seem to use it
> with anything other than great difficulty. The fact that I still use Outlook
> Express when I could be using Xnews is an indication of where I am with it..
>

It isn't exactly the most user-friendly program around. I would
recommend giving 40tude Dialog or Xananews a spin.

> > I'll go further and recommend the Usenet Improvement Project
> > <http://improve-usenet.org>, which has information about blocking
> > Google Groups posts entirely
>
> That's pretty drastic, considering the number of non-spammers who also useit.

Exactly why I don't endorse it, and would rather have a gigantic
filter file, adding every new incarnation of spammer addys.

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:56:19 -0700, Javier González Nicolini wrote:

> On Apr 30, 7:41Â*pm, "DavidW" <n...@email.provided> wrote:
>
>> Javier Gonzalez wrote:
>>
>>> you could also, say, block ...."7543" in the subject,
>>
>> Bad example isn't it?
>
> Au contraire, an excellent example - threads with "7543" in the
> subject usually degenerate into mindless drivel faster than the
> average thread in RST.

They start out that way.

--

Take a deep breath, take a walk, cool off, plot a bit, and serve again.