On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 21:31:56 +0000, Ian Goddard <goddai01@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> Dave Hinz wrote:
>> Your concept is OK but your proposals for execution are unworkable.
>> Here's a suggestion on how to fix it, at least as seen at your end.
>> 1. Subscribe to a newsfeed which filters out the obvious spam before
you
>> even see it. news.individual.net costs 20 bucks a year or so, and
>> blocks a lot of the crap I see people complain about but don't see in
my
>> newsreader.
> *Not* acceptable. Why should *I* have to pay for other peoples'
> misbehaviour. This is what it comes down to.
Well, I guess it comes down to, if you're so cheap that 8 cents a day is
too much, maybe you could just suffer in silence then. *****ing about
it doesn't accomplish anything positive, when you've been given several
good cheap and/or free solutions to your problem.
>> 2. Use a newsreader that sup****ts killfiles, especially one that allows
>> you to use regular expressions (regexp) for killfile rules.
>
> *Not* acceptable. My preference is to use the all-in-one package which
> is Seamonkey. Why should I have my preference dictated by low-life
> parasites violating the T&Cs of the service providers they use?
(shrug) if Seamonkey doesn't do the filtering, then perhaps your choice
is, you know, _wrong_.
>> 3. Block anything crossposted to 3 or more groups. It's either spam,
or
>> a cross-posted troll. Of course there may be counterexamples but,
>> signal:noise ratio being what it is, the occasional on-topic message
>> that HAPPENS to be right for 3 groups at a time, is rare enough that
>> I'll risk missing it to throw out all the trolls & spam that rule hits.
>
> See 2.
What, that you have a crappy newsreader that doesn't sup****t killfiles?
How is this OUR problem? Get a better one.
>> Sure, re****t spam when you think it will do good. I've been doing it
>> for years. But playing whack-a-mole, or denial of service games
against
>> google, isn't going to get you anywhere, and MIGHT just annoy your ISP
>> enough that _you_ are the one who has to find a new provider.
> Think this through. If spam goes unchecked there are two possible
outcomes.
(sigh). I've been at this for decades. I KNOW HOW IT WORKS. I have
learned what you probably never will, that some battles aren't going to
be won. Get over it. Filter on your end, because human nature is such
that you're never going to stop every low-life from doing the behaviours
you don't like. The easy thing is, recognizing said lowlifes
programatically is simple, if you don't lock yourself into a tool which
is too underfeatured to sup****t this basic function of a newsreader.
> 1. If by doing nothing we let spam gain de facto acceptance then the
> advertisers who go through Google and your site can cut out the middle
> man and advertise directly by spamming. You lose, Google loses, even
> the OP loses.
I never said to "do nothing" about the problem. My posting history is
quite clear that I am aggressivly against spam.
> 2. People desert newsgroups in favour of policed forums. For instance
> I wouldn't bother using news to post a Ubuntu query, I'd go to the
> Ubuntu forums.
Your choice. Maybe you can find a genealogy forum to your liking.
Good luck with that.
|
