Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

Archive-name: mail/anti-ube-pointer
Posting-Frequency: 2 times a month
Maintainer: Jari Aalto A T cante net

Announcement: "Bounces, Challenge-response systems, MTA, Bayesian tools (article pointer)"

Availability

FAQ archive is at http://www.faqs.org/faqs/

This message is an excerpt from bigger from Procmail Module
Library project's README.html document titled "Procmail
strategies against spam." available at
http://pm-lib.sourceforge.net/

The key points discussed in the document:

- Auto-replying or bouncing is considered a bad tactic
- MTA rejects can be abused and system administrators should
check their setup at least in regard to viruses.
- Challenge-Response system is based on false assumption that sender's
address can be used for authentication. It cannot and thus any C-R
system will contribute nothing else by amplifying the spam problem.

See picture http://pm-lib.sourceforge.net/pic/cr-system-joe-job.png

What should be done then?

- Bayesian tools are non-intrusive, harm no third parties
(in contrast to C-R), are easy to use and provide a good shelter.
- Battery of bayesian tools give even better shield due to
each program using a slightly different algorithm.

Many clarifying pictures are included:

- How address harvesting works
- How viruses should not be treated (at MTA level)
- Challenge-Response based authentication (overview)
- Challenge-Response system causing "Joe-Job"
- How MTA level UBE prevention works
- Procmail with battery of statistical tools

Table of contents:

1.0 Thoughts about increasing spam annoyance
1.1 Bouncing messages do no good
1.2 Rule based systems are not the solution
1.3 Challenge-Response systems make matters worse
1.3.1 Challenge-Response is not a doorbell but a
gun shooting decoys
1.3.2 Questioning Challenge-Response systems implementations
1.3.3 Summary - What are the effects of Challenge-Response
systems
1.4 Spam appearing in your yard - a story

2.0 A lightweight UBE block system with pure procmail
2.1 Suitable for accounts which ...
2.2 Where to put "pure procmail" UBE checks?
2.3 Using Procmail Module Library to fight spam

3.0 A heavyweight UBE blocking system
3.1 Advice for Debian Exim 4 mail system administrator
3.2 Advice for the normal account
3.3 Configuring Bayesian programs
3.4 A heavyweight spam catch setup using procmail

Some terminology

._UBE_ = Unsolicited Bulk Email
._UCE_ = (subset of UBE) Unsolicited Commercial Email

_Spam_ = Spam describes a particular kind of Usenet posting (and
canned spiced ham), but is now often used to describe many kinds of
inappropriate activities, including some email-related events. It
is technically incorrect to use "spam" to describe email abuse,
although attempting to correct the practice would amount to tilting
at windmills.

_Spam_ = definition by Erik Beckjord. "Some people decide that Spam
is anything you decide you want to ban if you can't handle the
intellectual load on a list." Remember, not to be confused with
real spam, which is unwanted bulk mail.

People are nowadays seeking a cure which will stop
or handle UBE. That can be easily done with procmail (under your
control) and with sendmail (by your sysadm). In order to select the
right strategy against UBE messages, you should read this section
and then decide how you will be using your procmail to deal with it.

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

On 18 Feb 2005 05:34:12 GMT, (Jari Aalto+mail.procmail) <> wrote:
>
>
> Archive-name: mail/anti-ube-pointer
> Posting-Frequency: 2 times a month
> Maintainer: Jari Aalto A T cante net
>
> Announcement: "Bounces, Challenge-response systems, MTA, Bayesian tools (article pointer)"
>

The information this person presents on Challenge-Responses
is just _garbage_. Pure disinformation.

Like all spammers and/or trolls he hates Challenge-Responses
because he can't beat them.

These systems do not accept anonymous mail.

But he's more than happy to tell you all about filters that
spammers can and do beat, all the time.

Theya are, after all, the world's leading experts in the use
of these filters.

What else have these criminals got to do with their time but
figure out ways to get their crap into your mailbox.

Want some accurate information on the topic? Try google and
be ready to run into the same disinformation on about half
the webpages that turn up: Spammers can put up webpages just
like anyone else. And they can post whatever they want on
the Usenet, like anyone else.

Or see the brief introduction to the topic on the website
in my sig.

_I_ don't get any spam. I don't even know when these creeps
_try_ to get their crap into my mailboxes unless I check
my logs.

I never have to mess with my filter.

No one I want to hear from has any problem getting through.

Spammers hate people like me.

That's fine: Being hated by human scum means that one is
doing something right.

They can post their garbage on the web and the Usenet, but they
can't get in my mailboxes, and it REALLY pisses them off.

Same for the trolls.

Doesn't it just make you want to cry?

[No, I won't be responding when this asshole brings out all
of his sockpuppets to repeat the same lies and distortions
about Challenge-Responses. I've killfiled most of them
anyway, and he really is a headcase. No fooling. Seriously
demented. Don't let him near your children or your pets.]

AC

--
Pro-Active Spam Fighter
Pass-list --> Spam-Filter --> Challenge-Response
http://tinyurl.com/2t5kp

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

begin Alan Connor wrote:

< snip typical Alan Connor garbage >

For a detailed read about the netkook Alan Connor, look here

http://angel.1jh.com/nanae/kooks/alanconnor.shtml
--
"Against stupidity, the very gods themselves contend in vain."
Friedrich Schiller

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

"Alan Connor" wrote in message
news:z0gRd.2990$IU.1403@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> On 18 Feb 2005 05:34:12 GMT, (Jari
> Aalto+mail.procmail) <> wrote:

Pile of crap deleted.

How about spreading the gospel over at alt.support.schizophrenia ? They
will really like your recollections of cosy threesomes with Bigfoot and
Princess Xena and they can give you advice on some neuroleptics that
might help you.

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

In article ,
zzzzzz@xxx.yyy says...

.....
>
> Like all spammers and/or trolls he hates Challenge-Responses
> because he can't beat them.
>

It's not just spammers that dislike Challenge-Responses. It all depends
upon who I am trying to send mail to, in most case, if somebody doesn't
want my mail, fine, they aren't going to get my mail; I am not going to
jump through their hoops.

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

Alan Connor wrote:

> On 18 Feb 2005 05:34:12 GMT, (Jari
> Aalto+mail.procmail) <> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Archive-name: mail/anti-ube-pointer
>> Posting-Frequency: 2 times a month
>> Maintainer: Jari Aalto A T cante net
>>
>> Announcement: "Bounces, Challenge-response systems, MTA, Bayesian tools
>> (article pointer)"
>>
>
> The information this person presents on Challenge-Responses
> is just _garbage_. Pure disinformation.
>
> Like all spammers and/or trolls he hates Challenge-Responses
> because he can't beat them.
>
> These systems do not accept anonymous mail.
>
> But he's more than happy to tell you all about filters that
> spammers can and do beat, all the time.
>
> Theya are, after all, the world's leading experts in the use
> of these filters.
>
> What else have these criminals got to do with their time but
> figure out ways to get their crap into your mailbox.
>
> Want some accurate information on the topic? Try google and
> be ready to run into the same disinformation on about half
> the webpages that turn up: Spammers can put up webpages just
> like anyone else. And they can post whatever they want on
> the Usenet, like anyone else.
>
> Or see the brief introduction to the topic on the website
> in my sig.
>
> _I_ don't get any spam. I don't even know when these creeps
> _try_ to get their crap into my mailboxes unless I check
> my logs.
>
> I never have to mess with my filter.
>
> No one I want to hear from has any problem getting through.
>
> Spammers hate people like me.
>
> That's fine: Being hated by human scum means that one is
> doing something right.
>
> They can post their garbage on the web and the Usenet, but they
> can't get in my mailboxes, and it REALLY pisses them off.
>
> Same for the trolls.
>
> Doesn't it just make you want to cry?
>
> [No, I won't be responding when this asshole brings out all
> of his sockpuppets to repeat the same lies and distortions
> about Challenge-Responses. I've killfiled most of them
> anyway, and he really is a headcase. No fooling. Seriously
> demented. Don't let him near your children or your pets.]
>
> AC
>

you are a spammer and a k00k, please move to Canada where they like commies.

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

* ghoulxr :
>
> you are a spammer and a k00k, please move to Canada where they like commies.


You have the first correct but while we are more tolerant then you
americans who seem to like the 50's era of tolerance we dont want him
either up here.

Jason

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 06:35:11 GMT, Alan Connor wrote:

>_I_ don't get any spam.

You just send your spam to innocen victims to handle for you. And that
makes you a spammer.

William R. James

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

quoting ghoulxr who had nothing better to do than
to post a followup to some well-known loon...
>...please move to Canada where they like commies.


hey, you won today's lottery, a live polar bear.

Come visit our selection of those cuddly darlings, and pick one
(before one picks you, as it might turn out ;-)


--
/"\ ASCII... ._. || ...unn wenn da ebb's naedd bassd,
\ / on Usenet /v\ || no ka'sch's halde wi sella uff'em Dach!
X ANYTHING ELSE /( )\ || nice photos --> www.romanticgermany.com
/ \ IS BLOAT !! ^^ ^^ ||--> EscapeCellHell.org (Consumers Union) <--

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

Alan Connor wrote:
> On 18 Feb 2005 05:34:12 GMT, (Jari Aalto+mail.procmail) <> wrote:
>
> _I_ don't get any spam. I don't even know when these creeps
> _try_ to get their crap into my mailboxes unless I check
> my logs.
>
> I never have to mess with my filter.
>
> No one I want to hear from has any problem getting through.
>
> Spammers hate people like me.
>
> That's fine: Being hated by human scum means that one is
> doing something right.
>
> They can post their garbage on the web and the Usenet, but they
> can't get in my mailboxes, and it REALLY pisses them off.
>
> Same for the trolls.
>
> Doesn't it just make you want to cry?
>
> [No, I won't be responding when this asshole brings out all
> of his sockpuppets to repeat the same lies and distortions
> about Challenge-Responses. I've killfiled most of them
> anyway, and he really is a headcase. No fooling. Seriously
> demented. Don't let him near your children or your pets.]
>
You are creating a huge amount of backscatter with
challenge-response. You are creating as much spam as you reject.
You're just moving it NIMBY style.

Greylisting (which I don't use myself) is MUCH cleaner than
challenge-response. Moreover, CR is inappropriate for a business system.
--

Total Quality Management - A Commitment to Excellence
NOTE: Displayed address is a SPAM TRAP
Fight Spam: http://www.tqmcube.com/rbldnsd.htm
Daily Updates: http://www.tqmcube.com/spam_trap.htm

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

Alan Connor writes:

> On 18 Feb 2005 05:34:12 GMT, (Jari Aalto+mail.procmail) <> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Archive-name: mail/anti-ube-pointer
>> Posting-Frequency: 2 times a month
>> Maintainer: Jari Aalto A T cante net
>>
>> Announcement: "Bounces, Challenge-response systems, MTA, Bayesian tools (article pointer)"
>>
>
> The information this person presents on Challenge-Responses
> is just _garbage_. Pure disinformation.


I think it is important for newcomers here to state plainly what may be
obvious:-

A. That Jari Aalto maintains several FAQS and lists of pointers that are
genuinely valuable sources of good, accurate information. Many users
of the emacsen and procmail owe him a lot. Thanks Jari!!

B. That Alan Connor is _obsessed_ with his own "solution" to the problem of
spam, and shows every sign of being deranged. Others have already
pointed out entertaining online reading about this :-)

atb

Glyn

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 16:21:51 +0000, Glyn Millington
wrote:

> Alan Connor writes:
>
>> On 18 Feb 2005 05:34:12 GMT, (Jari
>> Aalto+mail.procmail) <> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Archive-name: mail/anti-ube-pointer Posting-Frequency: 2
>>> times a month Maintainer: Jari Aalto A T cante net
>>>
>>> Announcement: "Bounces, Challenge-response systems, MTA,
>>> Bayesian tools (article pointer)"
>>
>>
>> The information this person presents on Challenge-Responses is
>> just _garbage_. Pure disinformation.
>
>
> I think it is important for newcomers here to state plainly
> what may be obvious:-
>
> A. That Jari Aalto maintains several FAQS and lists of
> pointers that are genuinely valuable sources of good, accurate
> information. Many users of the emacsen and procmail owe him a
> lot. Thanks Jari!!
>

Sure. I didn't say anything negative about the rest of his
work.

> B. That Alan Connor is _obsessed_ with his own "solution"
> to the problem of spam, and shows every sign of being
> deranged.

If I was obsessed by "my own solution to the problem of spam"
I would post about it all the time.

I don't, therefore I am not "obsessed".

DUH.

Nor is it "my" solution. Challenge-Responses were around a long
time before I owned my first computer.


> Others have already pointed out entertaining online
> reading about this :-)
>

Most of them being the sock puppets of one demented troll.

Which I suspect that you are too.

Why else would you post such nonsense?

Spammers and trolls HATE Challenge-Response systems because
they can't beat them.

And they obviously have no ethical restraints and will post
whatever they want people to believe.

Post any crap that you want, "Glyn".

Just stay out of my mailboxes.

That's not a request, it is a done deal.

Oh: And you are boring.

Killfiled.

(Again: You munged your headers to get past my killfile.)

AC

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 19:08:35 GMT, Alan Connor wrote:

>On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 16:21:51 +0000, Glyn Millington
> wrote:
>
>> Alan Connor writes:
>>
>>> On 18 Feb 2005 05:34:12 GMT, (Jari
>>> Aalto+mail.procmail) <> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Archive-name: mail/anti-ube-pointer Posting-Frequency: 2
>>>> times a month Maintainer: Jari Aalto A T cante net
>>>>
>>>> Announcement: "Bounces, Challenge-response systems, MTA,
>>>> Bayesian tools (article pointer)"
>>>
>>>
>>> The information this person presents on Challenge-Responses is
>>> just _garbage_. Pure disinformation.
>>
>>
>> I think it is important for newcomers here to state plainly
>> what may be obvious:-
>>
>> A. That Jari Aalto maintains several FAQS and lists of
>> pointers that are genuinely valuable sources of good, accurate
>> information. Many users of the emacsen and procmail owe him a
>> lot. Thanks Jari!!
>>
>
>Sure. I didn't say anything negative about the rest of his
>work.

Nobody would care anyway so....

>> B. That Alan Connor is _obsessed_ with his own "solution"
>> to the problem of spam, and shows every sign of being
>> deranged.
>
>If I was obsessed by "my own solution to the problem of spam"
>I would post about it all the time.
>
>I don't, therefore I am not "obsessed".

Then why do I see all the same ole shit from Alan Con[man]er then?

>DUH.
>
>Nor is it "my" solution. Challenge-Responses were around a long
>time before I owned my first computer.

Your problem as stated by so many is that you do not provide a
solution to spam. You of course refuse to listen to anybody else and
that means you are obsessed.

>> Others have already pointed out entertaining online
>> reading about this :-)
>>
>
>Most of them being the sock puppets of one demented troll.

You said any that disagree with you are spammers Alan.

>Which I suspect that you are too.

Of course he is, he disagrees with you.

>Why else would you post such nonsense?

Factual information ignored continually by you means you are obsessed.

>Spammers and trolls HATE Challenge-Response systems because
>they can't beat them.

And real people hate this because it impairs real one-to-one
communication. Something you continually ignore. You are obsessed
Alan but you can now start saying I am a spammer as you do with all
who disagree with you.

>And they obviously have no ethical restraints and will post
>whatever they want people to believe.

Yep. Bastards that speak their own mind should be removed from the
net or called spammers in the very least.

Rat bastards they are for posting what they believe.

>Post any crap that you want, "Glyn".

He most likely will and I bet he won't ask your permission to do so.
he is a rat bastard and an asshole that posts without your permission.
I bet he is a spammer too Alan, what do you think?

>Just stay out of my mailboxes.

I bet he does that as well.

>That's not a request, it is a done deal.

Then why say it?

>Oh: And you are boring.

Then why did you reply?

>Killfiled.

Your choice to remove intelligent people from the discussion. The
problem is it usually neuters the discussion and you end up always
winning because you remove all opposing views.

Said to be required to resort to such tactics just so you can finally
win one.

>(Again: You munged your headers to get past my killfile.)

If you are unable to maintain a killfile who would trust you to manage
anything else? Nevermind, we both know you will call me a spammer, or
say I am now boring and then killfile me so you can feel victorious.

Good luck in your life Alan as you will need it to function.

>AC
>

--
Mark Ferguson

Sun Tsu is a snitch and a rat bastard that sells out any that he
does not agree with.

Message-ID: <5a07596f.0411251110.5f6a25d9@posting.google.com>

"Why don't you ever go into detail about how you asked theBanana(tm)
to do research on Andrew Conru and AdultFriendFinder.com for you after
stating that the court had ordered you "not to" because of your
lawsuit?".

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

This is a MIME GnuPG-signed message. If you see this text, it means that
your E-mail or Usenet software does not support MIME signed messages.

--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-21497-1108936308-0002
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Beavis writes:

> On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 16:21:51 +0000, Glyn Millington
> wrote:
>
>
>> B. That Alan Connor is _obsessed_ with his own "solution"
>> to the problem of spam, and shows every sign of being
>> deranged.
>
> If I was obsessed by "my own solution to the problem of spam"
> I would post about it all the time.

"Results 1 - 10 of 329 for challenge response group:comp.mail.misc
author:Alan author:Connor."

>> Others have already pointed out entertaining online
>> reading about this :-)
>>
>
> Most of them being the sock puppets of one demented troll.
>
> Which I suspect that you are too.

http://angel.1jh.com/nanae/kooks/alanconnor.shtml#Sam

> Why else would you post such nonsense?

Perhaps, because he's right?

> Spammers and trolls HATE Challenge-Response systems because
> they can't beat them.

Beavis: the technical flaws and problems with this approach have been
explained to you before. Your reaction is typical of mentally-immature
individuals to anyone who points out something that they disagree with on a
purely emotional basis, but have no logical counterpoint for.

> And they obviously have no ethical restraints and will post
> whatever they want people to believe.
>
> Post any crap that you want, "Glyn".

Why should he, when you've got that bullet point covered so well.

> Just stay out of my mailboxes.
>
> That's not a request, it is a done deal.

Beavis, where did he express the frightening desire to ever send you any
mail for any reason? You have a very flattering opinion of yourself. But I
tell you what: _YOU_ stay out of _MY_ mailbox. It's not a request. It's an
order.

> Oh: And you are boring.
>
> Killfiled.

For 60, or 90 seconds, this time?

http://angel.1jh.com/nanae/kooks/alanconnor.shtml#KillfiledF or

> (Again: You munged your headers to get past my killfile.)

Would you mind posting your killfile, Beavis?



--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-21497-1108936308-0002
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBCGQZ0x9p3GYHlUOIRApgYAJ492/PYM0z0IkHX4PEJBplQhpdSDgCf YhDU
NG9+6pJ/nmdywT9+f7JafHQ=
=EOz5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-21497-1108936308-0002--

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

Alan Connor writes:

> Killfiled.
>
> (Again: You munged your headers to get past my killfile.)

Would you care to provide the links to the articles I have posted which
would validate that claim?





Glyn

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

Alan Connor wrote:

>>B. That Alan Connor is _obsessed_ with his own "solution"
>>to the problem of spam, and shows every sign of being
>>deranged.

> If I was obsessed by "my own solution to the problem of spam"
> I would post about it all the time.
>
> I don't, therefore I am not "obsessed".
>
> DUH.
>
> Nor is it "my" solution. Challenge-Responses were around a long
> time before I owned my first computer.
>
>
>
>>Others have already pointed out entertaining online
>>reading about this :-)
>>
>
>
> Most of them being the sock puppets of one demented troll.
>
> Which I suspect that you are too.
>
> Why else would you post such nonsense?

"I'm not paranoid - WHO TOLD YOU I WAS PARANOID!!!!!"


while $RECIEVED_RESPONSE ; do echo "

> Spammers and trolls HATE Challenge-Response systems because
> they can't beat them.

" ; done


> And they obviously have no ethical restraints and will post
> whatever they want people to believe.

I suppose that means me too now?


> Post any crap that you want, "Glyn".

am I going to be called "Tommi" now?

> Just stay out of my mailboxes.

now that's a bit of a paradox. I'm sure you're going to yap about
keeping "me" out as well, but seeing as I have no interest in
communicating with you privately, I don't see it becoming an issue.

even in the case that I -would- want to there'd still be barriers:

1) b0rkb0rkb0rk CR systems - which I never respond to unless I'm
absolutely certain about the recipient.
2) I don't _know_ your email, you're not coming `clean'. for all your
advertising CR as unbeatable, I wonder why you're masquerading.
(no, blaming kiddiots that will try and `hax0r j00' doesn't qualify for
an excuse, that means you're aware of bugs in your system which you
should spend time fixing instead of mudflinging)

3) why would I -want- to mail you?

can you iterate this loop once more?

default_response_when_out_of_arguments() {
// once people would cry "jew" if they ran out of arguments, I do the
following:
> That's not a request, it is a done deal.
>
> Oh: And you are boring.
>
> Killfiled.

}

oh, and do claim I've done the same - I like the credit to my name,
but I'm too lazy to actually do anything but write this post.

> (Again: You munged your headers to get past my killfile.)
>
> AC

/Tommi

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

Glyn Millington wrote:

>>(Again: You munged your headers to get past my killfile.)
>
>
> Would you care to provide the links to the articles I have posted which
> would validate that claim?
ofcourse not, he has `killfiled' you, that means he's going to avoid
topics he can't win.

ofcourse, if he find a topic on which he can cry wolf, you're
automagically off the killfile ;)

/Tommi

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Alan Connor wrote:
> On 18 Feb 2005 05:34:12 GMT, (Jari Aalto+mail.procmail) <> wrote:
> The information this person presents on Challenge-Responses
> is just _garbage_. Pure disinformation.

And what you present isn't? You have proven to us repeatedly over the past 2
years that everything you have said is absolute trash. Go away. No one wants
you here (and that's been proven too).

> _I_ don't get any spam. I don't even know when these creeps
> _try_ to get their crap into my mailboxes unless I check
> my logs.

You just spam others and call it "challenge/response."

> No one I want to hear from has any problem getting through.

No one wants to hear from you either.

> Spammers hate people like me.

So does everyone else.

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, Alan Connor wrote:
> > B. That Alan Connor is _obsessed_ with his own "solution"
> > to the problem of spam, and shows every sign of being
> > deranged.
>
> If I was obsessed by "my own solution to the problem of spam"
> I would post about it all the time.

And you certainly have.

> Spammers and trolls HATE Challenge-Response systems because
> they can't beat them.

Actually, spammers LIKE C/R systems, because to the spammer, it is no different
than having an "open relay" to play with. This has been proven to you many
times before. Accept it.

It's NORMAL people who hate C/R systems. Why should they have to be punished
into "jumping through some hoop" to have their legitimate mail sent through
while nothing new happens to the spammer?

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

Mark Ferguson "phool of NANAE" wrote:

> Factual information ignored continually by you means you are
obsessed.


Well, Shirley you are an authority on obsession.

> >Killfiled.
>
> Your choice to remove intelligent people from the discussion.
> The problem is it usually neuters the discussion and you end
> up always winning because you remove all opposing views.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

That is your MO, oldman, but you never win. You only _think_ you win.
Sick old basta@ds like yourslef cannot learn new tricks so you wallow
in st00pidity until you die.

You say that you K/F for "effect" only but you really don't simply your
k00k mentality _needs_ to know everything said about your kook self.

> >(Again: You munged your headers to get past my killfile.)
>
> If you are unable to maintain a killfile who would trust you

Yeppers, you don't know how to manage a killfile, but even if you did,
who would trust al old man who asks someone to violate a court order
out of selfish motives?

Has the FBI spammed you with child pr0n lately?


Cheers,

SuN

--
"I would not say the FBI on a whim. It looks to be official
sanctioning of multiple kiddie porn site where it even states
those involved are under age."

"This has all the making of an FBI kiddie porn spam run
and I am tired of kiddie porn spam from law enforcement."

-Mark Ferguson, making a fool of himself yet again in NANAE
claiming that the FBI is a child pr0n spammer


Google Groups: View Thread "Tired of kiddie porn spammers?"

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

On 21 Feb 2005 12:37:26 -0800, The Snitch @spamblocked.com wrote
nothing of importance:

>
>Mark Ferguson "phool of NANAE" wrote:
>
>> Factual information ignored continually by you means you are
>obsessed.

Whining for attention....

>Cheers,
>
>SuN

--
Mark Ferguson

Sun Tsu is a snitch and a rat bastard that sells out any that he
does not agree with.

Message-ID: <5a07596f.0411251110.5f6a25d9@posting.google.com>

"Why don't you ever go into detail about how you asked theBanana(tm)
to do research on Andrew Conru and AdultFriendFinder.com for you after
stating that the court had ordered you "not to" because of your
lawsuit?".

Re: Fighting email spam and anti-UBE pointers

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 00:29:04 +0000, Glyn Millington wrote:
> Alan Connor writes:
>
>> Killfiled.
>>
>> (Again: You munged your headers to get past my killfile.)
>
> Would you care to provide the links to the articles I have posted which
> would validate that claim?

Links to imaginary things in a delusional mind are notoriously unreliable.

--
_________________________________________
NetworkElf: Super Genius, Computer Guy, Harley Owner!
Blindly serving the covert purposes of the
criminal-minded maniac behind Spews since 2003.