1 Mar 2003 02:31
Re: OT: spam
kevin lyda <kevin <at> ie.suberic.net>
2003-03-01 01:31:59 GMT
2003-03-01 01:31:59 GMT
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 05:47:59PM -0600, David Champion wrote: > Yes, of course. But it doesn't have to be an identifying address, just a > functioning one; and many spammers are traceable to this extent already, > and don't mind. this is way, way offtopic, but as a data point i've come across 10 spams (from 10 different spammers) out of about 20,000 spams that replied to the confirm message. so either my confirm message is sufficiently frightening to spammers (i charge EUR 1,000 to review confirmed spams) or this must be a new meaning for "many" that has somehow elluded me. again, i highly suggest people look at tmda, or systems that work like tmda. i'm not saying everyone should use it or anything, i'm just saying that i find it highly effective. kevin -- -- kevin <at> ie.suberic.net if the un could speak... fork()'ed on 37058400 dubya (excited): "the un risks being irrelevant!" meatspace place: home un (dejected): "it beats being irresponsible." http://ie.suberic.net/~kevin/ (inspired by http://www.claybennett.com/)
RSS Feed