Re: Address munging

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 13:32:00 -0600 (MDT), Vernon Schryver wrote:
>
>
> In article <97t0q1-ud8.ln1@kynerd.no-ip.com>,
> Tim Kynerd wrote:
>
>>> I'm still not munging, and see less reason for it now than a few years ago.
>>
>>That may be your experience, and I respect that. My experience is very,
>>very different.
>>
>>I've started using Sneakemail addresses to post to Usenet. Every time I
>>switch addresses, the new one gets flooded with spam within a week. That
>>proves to me that spammers are still actively harvesting addresses from
>>Usenet.
>
> That is a non sequitur. The spam sent my direction continues to
> increase. In the last 40 days, my filters caught 20931 messages or
> 523 messages/day.
>
> It is not that my addresses are not continually re-harvested from
> Usenet, web pages, mailing lists, domain contact information, and
> elsewhere, but that thanks to a reasonable set of filters that anyone
> can duplicate, less than 0.01% of that spam gets through, with a false
> positive rate (rejected legitimate/total legimate) of less than 0.5%
>
>

Mine is 0%. And I don't have to waste any time looking through spam,
which rather defeats the whole purpose of a spam filter: If you read it,
the spammers have one the first battle.

Nor do I have to update my filters.

MY filter, which eliminates 100% of the spam, can be installed and
configured and used by a newbie.

AC


--
Pass-List -----> Block-List ----> Challenge-Response
The key to taking control of your mailbox. Design Parameters:
http://tinyurl.com/2t5kp || http://tinyurl.com/3c3ag
Challenge-Response links -- http://tinyurl.com/yrfjb

Re: Address munging

Alan Connor wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 13:32:00 -0600 (MDT), Vernon Schryver wrote:
>
>>
>>In article <97t0q1-ud8.ln1@kynerd.no-ip.com>,
>>Tim Kynerd wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>I'm still not munging, and see less reason for it now than a few years ago.
>>>
>>>That may be your experience, and I respect that. My experience is very,
>>>very different.
>>>
>>>I've started using Sneakemail addresses to post to Usenet. Every time I
>>>switch addresses, the new one gets flooded with spam within a week. That
>>>proves to me that spammers are still actively harvesting addresses from
>>>Usenet.
>>
>>That is a non sequitur. The spam sent my direction continues to
>>increase. In the last 40 days, my filters caught 20931 messages or
>>523 messages/day.
>>
>>It is not that my addresses are not continually re-harvested from
>>Usenet, web pages, mailing lists, domain contact information, and
>>elsewhere, but that thanks to a reasonable set of filters that anyone
>>can duplicate, less than 0.01% of that spam gets through, with a false
>>positive rate (rejected legitimate/total legimate) of less than 0.5%
>>
>>
>
>
> Mine is 0%. And I don't have to waste any time looking through spam,
> which rather defeats the whole purpose of a spam filter: If you read it,
> the spammers have one the first battle.
>
> Nor do I have to update my filters.
>
> MY filter, which eliminates 100% of the spam, can be installed and
> configured and used by a newbie.
>
> AC
>
>



If it was that good you wouldn't need to munge your address.I have
devised a whole new dx for you 'chronic bullshitting disorder'