«

Mark Shroyer wrote:

> In article <>,
> "Default User" <> wrote:

> > I personally just don't believe in canning whole domains. I've had
> > excellent luck setting up filters to take care of the spam.
>
> On the contrary, I think that filtering whole networks is one of the
> most effective ways to fight spam in the long run, as it cumulatively
> puts pressure on the network owner to do something about all the spam
> coming from their network. This is the very principle behind UDP and
> it has worked well in the past, but I think it can be just as
> effective if the blocking is performed by some critical mass of
> individual users rather than by the server administrators (who are
> generally hesitant to UDP someone as big as Google).

I certainly agree that if it was anyone besides the $900 billion
gorilla, it would UDP by now. Nobody has ever allowed spam like this
before.

> But out of curiosity, what filtering techniques / software are you
> using?

Just good old-fashioned keyword matching in the subject lines. Every
once in a while I have to add something new, but like today, no spam
here at all.



Brian

James Kanze wrote:
>> I guess those users always have the option to use a real newsserver -
> Some of us post from behind a firewall, which won't transmit
> NNTP. We don't have a choice: it's Google Groups or nothing.

Darn. I just had my filter to delete everything from @gmail.com set up,
then I read this post of yours - only because filter didn't apply to
already downloaded stuff... I need a whitelist :/ I hate it when spam is
being forced down my throat.

:/

Lars

itdevries wrote:
> I'm spending some time reporting a lot of it to google, not sure if it
> helps but it eases my frustration...

Hehe - I just attempted (in vain) to get my news provider to UDP google.
Cowards!

Best Regards,

Lars

In message
<43deaddb-a62b-47aa-950e->,
James Kanze <> writes
>On 18 avr, 11:04, Lars Uffmann <a...@nurfuerspam.de> wrote:
>> Mark Shroyer wrote:
>> > months, and that was enough to finally push me over the
>> > edge... I mean, I feel bad that I'll be blocking some smart
>> > and interesting people in the process, but at this point
>> > it's either that or give up on Usenet altogether.
>
>> I guess those users always have the option to use a real newsserver -
>
>Some of us post from behind a firewall, which won't transmit
>NNTP. We don't have a choice: it's Google Groups or nothing.

True, but it might make distinguishing you from the spam a little easier
if you could arrange for your From: header to contain something other
than a gmail.com address, as most of the spam appears to be from
throwaway gmail accounts.


--
Richard Herring

On 04/ 6/10 12:03 PM, Robert Miles wrote:
>
> With today's spam, I would find it more useful to have a filter
> that will check incoming posts for any of a list of web sites, and
> if any of them are found, delete that post. Of course, my
> newsreader does not offer that option.

Nothing appears to have got through the filters news.individual.net for
several days. You need to look at getting a better service.

--
Ian Collins

* Rolf Magnus:
> Robert Miles wrote:
>
>> "itdevries" <> wrote in message
>> news:17a06176-264f-40a3-9a1e-...
>> back in 2008
>> On Apr 18, 10:09 am, Lars Uffmann <a...@nurfuerspam.de> wrote:
>>> Is it just me or was that about the worst flooding in months? I'm
>>> seriously thinking the severe punishment for spammers should be made a
>>> prerequisite for countries wanting to join the WTO....
>>>
>>> Damn annoying...
>>>
>>> Nm & Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Lars
>> I'm spending some time reporting a lot of it to google, not sure if it
>> helps but it eases my frustration...
>>
>> itdevries
>> ---
>> My experience with reporting spam to Google Groups is that you
>> can expect them to do something about it. But not until 4 to 6
>> weeks after you send the spam report, and not at all for any spam
>> that no one reports (i. e., most of it).
>
> Hmm, From Google, I've never seen any reaction to my reports at all. And
> even if they do something about it, the spammer just needs to create a new
> account and go on. IMHO, Google is a disease (at least on Usenet). Close to
> 100% of Usenet's spam is posted via Google Groups.

+1

Robert Miles wrote:

> "itdevries" <> wrote in message
> news:17a06176-264f-40a3-9a1e-...
> back in 2008
> On Apr 18, 10:09 am, Lars Uffmann <a...@nurfuerspam.de> wrote:
>> Is it just me or was that about the worst flooding in months? I'm
>> seriously thinking the severe punishment for spammers should be made a
>> prerequisite for countries wanting to join the WTO....
>>
>> Damn annoying...
>>
>> Nm & Best Regards,
>>
>> Lars
>
> I'm spending some time reporting a lot of it to google, not sure if it
> helps but it eases my frustration...
>
> itdevries
> ---
> My experience with reporting spam to Google Groups is that you
> can expect them to do something about it. But not until 4 to 6
> weeks after you send the spam report, and not at all for any spam
> that no one reports (i. e., most of it).

Hmm, From Google, I've never seen any reaction to my reports at all. And
even if they do something about it, the spammer just needs to create a new
account and go on. IMHO, Google is a disease (at least on Usenet). Close to
100% of Usenet's spam is posted via Google Groups.

Ian Collins <ian-> writes:
>> With today's spam, I would find it more useful to have a filter
>> that will check incoming posts for any of a list of web sites, and
>> if any of them are found, delete that post. Of course, my
>> newsreader does not offer that option.
>
> Nothing appears to have got through the filters news.individual.net for
> several days. You need to look at getting a better service.

Seriously.

I use news.individual.net, and AFAICT, there's essentially no spam.

[Kinda like gmail that way.]

-Miles

--
Christian, n. One who follows the teachings of Christ so long as they are not
inconsistent with a life of sin.

"Miles Bader" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Ian Collins <ian-> writes:
>>> With today's spam, I would find it more useful to have a filter
>>> that will check incoming posts for any of a list of web sites, and
>>> if any of them are found, delete that post. Of course, my
>>> newsreader does not offer that option.
>>
>> Nothing appears to have got through the filters news.individual.net for
>> several days. You need to look at getting a better service.
>
> Seriously.
>
> I use news.individual.net, and AFAICT, there's essentially no spam.

NIN uses a variety of "cleanfeed". I think primarily that's to eliminate
binaries from their text-only system, but it also gets most of the spam. So,
yay NIN.




Brian