Knarf wrote:

Knarf Knarf, who's there? :-)

Irv VE6BP

--------------------------------------
Visit my HomePage at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv/
Visit my Baby Sofia website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv4/
Visit my OLDTIMERS website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv5/
--------------------
Irv Finkleman,
Grampa/Ex-Navy/Old Fart/Ham Radio VE6BP
Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Just checking to see if I can post with a "Munged" e-mail address to
minimize spam. Also an alias, with my name backwards, is supposed to cut
down on the probability of such junk. Almost never post on NGs, but now
feel a bit safer. Did post here a few days ago, and already seeing spam
increasing. Bypassing ISP's filter, and experimenting with "MailWasher".
So far in three months it does not seem to be working.

Regards,

Frank

(VE6CB)


"Irv Finkleman" wrote in message
...
Knarf wrote:

Knarf Knarf, who's there? :-)

Irv VE6BP

--------------------------------------
Visit my HomePage at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv/
Visit my Baby Sofia website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv4/
Visit my OLDTIMERS website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv5/
--------------------
Irv Finkleman,
Grampa/Ex-Navy/Old Fart/Ham Radio VE6BP
Calgary, Alberta, Canada

On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 10:39:15 GMT, "Knarf"
wrote:
Just checking to see if I can post with a "Munged" e-mail address to
minimize spam. Also an alias, with my name backwards, is supposed to cut
down on the probability of such junk.

Hi Frank,

This is dreaming in technicolor and surround-sound. I post with my
full name and address in the clear and as a consequence never "see" as
much as one spam in a month. Certainly my filters kill up to 10 a
day, but as I said, I don't "see" them - takes all of two or three
seconds to automagically wipe them out on start up or take them out
like a bug-zapper when they straggle in.

I get far more spam on my business account with my address registered
with government agencies. I have to add one or two new spammers to my
kill file there each week and that currently outnumbers my killfile
here 7:1. The spam that I do see here isn't even addressed to me.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Hi Richard:

I don't want to attract any more spam. But am trying an experiment with
MailWasher. My ISP (Telus) has a very effective spam filter, and very
little gets through, but I turned it off as I wanted to see if bouncing spam
would stop it. I have been going now for three months and do not see much
change. Averaging about 33 spam messages a day. I plan to run the
experiment till the end of the year or so.

What bothers me is how much of this junk eats bandwidth up, and would like
to find a way to eliminate it. I have known many people who end up getting
so much spam that they dump their address and get a new one. I was
wondering if these spammers continue to send spam for ever to non-existent
addresses.

Had an e-mail from a local ham who says he was very successful with
MailWasher, so will give him a call and see if I am doing something wrong.

73, Frank Meredith
(VE6CB)


"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 10:39:15 GMT, "Knarf"
wrote:
Just checking to see if I can post with a "Munged" e-mail address to
minimize spam. Also an alias, with my name backwards, is supposed to cut
down on the probability of such junk.

Hi Frank,

This is dreaming in technicolor and surround-sound. I post with my
full name and address in the clear and as a consequence never "see" as
much as one spam in a month. Certainly my filters kill up to 10 a
day, but as I said, I don't "see" them - takes all of two or three
seconds to automagically wipe them out on start up or take them out
like a bug-zapper when they straggle in.

I get far more spam on my business account with my address registered
with government agencies. I have to add one or two new spammers to my
kill file there each week and that currently outnumbers my killfile
here 7:1. The spam that I do see here isn't even addressed to me.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 03:12:56 GMT, "Knarf"
wrote:

What bothers me is how much of this junk eats bandwidth up, and would like
to find a way to eliminate it.

Hi Frank,

Simple: Encrypted email with public keys, or private keys to verify
sender/recipient. The technology has been available for years (PGP),
and the RSA algorithms are public domain now (and have been for a
couple of years). It would kill the industry overnight just like the
"don't call" list instituted last year. The problem is inertia, and
Micro$oft wanting to do it their way (as if they had a clue about
network security).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Yes, I like the idea of verification, and have heard some people are using
it. Anyway I will keep bouncing for the next 3 or four months to see if it
diminishes my spam input. I know it is trivial to dump it when it comes
in -- which I do -- but it just bugs me that it exists.

73,

Frank


"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 03:12:56 GMT, "Knarf"
wrote:

What bothers me is how much of this junk eats bandwidth up, and would
like
to find a way to eliminate it.

Hi Frank,

Simple: Encrypted email with public keys, or private keys to verify
sender/recipient. The technology has been available for years (PGP),
and the RSA algorithms are public domain now (and have been for a
couple of years). It would kill the industry overnight just like the
"don't call" list instituted last year. The problem is inertia, and
Micro$oft wanting to do it their way (as if they had a clue about
network security).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC