«

thanks for the link. Very interesting and I will take some of the points on
board (preview etc....)
"Ionizer" <> wrote in message
news:bdk2fk$tvu66$...
> You're right- Mailwasher just adds an additional step, and I have wondered
> about how accurate it is about bouncing spam to its true sender. When
I've
> used it in the past though, most of my bounces where apparently
successful,
> and I felt that I did see a reduction of spam as a result- but then again
> I'm not precisely sure. It is handy for deleting from the server those
huge
> joke attachments from my sister-in-law, though.
>
> You're using Outlook Express, so you may find this spam filtering guide
> helpful: http://www.blackviper.com/Articles/OS/Email/filter1.htm
> These filters affect the mail as you download it from the server, of
course,
> and it does annoy me that the spam does get to my machine, even though it
is
> immediately deleted. When I asked the author of the above article about
> filtering spam before downloading it, this was his reply:
>
> "I used third party tools to "look" at email before I downloaded it. It
> seemed to me that it just increased the amount of time it took to sift
> through everything."
>
> Regards,
> Ian.
>
> "AntoineD" <> wrote in message
> news:J6dLa.6824$...
> > I am using mail washer and yes, it does filter the spam and I can choose
> to
> > delete it, create a blacklist and bounce the mail back (9 out of 10
times
> > the bounce will fail).
> > So first I check mail washer then OE.
> > Isn't it quicker to just check mail on OE as as usual and simply delete
> the
> > spam? Usually the header is a good clue if it is spam or not.
> > A spam killer does not stop YOU from getting spam, it just makes you get
> an
> > extra software, you still have to check your mail, delete etc..... It
does
> > not automate anything really. It actually adds an extra step to getting
> your
> > mail.
> > In the past I have used the spam killer from McAffee... same thing,
> really.
> > Will these programmes ever stop spam getting into your server to begin
> with?
> > So far I doubt it...
> > or am I missing the point altogether? Enlightenment welcome.
> > Regards
> > Antoined
> >
> >
>
>