steve auvache

WTF is going on?


--
steve auvache
A Bloo one with built in safety features

steve auvache

In article <prLNAIAWl3sGFwVc@auvache.force9.co.uk>, steve auvache
<dont_spam@thecow.me.uk> writes
>
>WTF is going on?

I know.

It is all to do with the new news server having a different numbering
sequence from the old news server and me using "some" as a newsreader.
My fault for being a user it seems.


--
steve auvache
A Bloo one with built in safety features

Badger

steve auvache wrote:
> In article <prLNAIAWl3sGFwVc@auvache.force9.co.uk>, steve auvache
> <dont_spam@thecow.me.uk> writes
>> WTF is going on?
>
> I know.
>
> It is all to do with the new news server having a different numbering
> sequence from the old news server and me using "some" as a newsreader.
> My fault for being a user it seems.

I'm glad it wasn't just me/Thunderbird.

--
Rick
NT650V (still)
TWA#11 BREast#6 BOTAFOT#139

Derek Turner

Badger wrote:
> steve auvache wrote:
>> In article <prLNAIAWl3sGFwVc@auvache.force9.co.uk>, steve auvache
>> <dont_spam@thecow.me.uk> writes
>>> WTF is going on?
>>
>> I know.
>>
>> It is all to do with the new news server having a different numbering
>> sequence from the old news server and me using "some" as a newsreader.
>> My fault for being a user it seems.
>
> I'm glad it wasn't just me/Thunderbird.
>
Did I read somewhere that they sold out to BT?

steve auvache

In article <26867$46b383bb$53d9ae04$13810@news.vispa.com>, Derek Turner
<frderek@cesmail.net> writes
>Badger wrote:
>> steve auvache wrote:
>>> In article <prLNAIAWl3sGFwVc@auvache.force9.co.uk>, steve auvache
>>> <dont_spam@thecow.me.uk> writes
>>>> WTF is going on?
>>>
>>> I know.
>>>
>>> It is all to do with the new news server having a different numbering
>>> sequence from the old news server and me using "some" as a newsreader.
>>> My fault for being a user it seems.
>>
>> I'm glad it wasn't just me/Thunderbird.
>>
>Did I read somewhere that they sold out to BT?

How can you sell out freeware?


--
steve auvache
A Bloo one with built in safety features

A.Lee

Derek Turner <frderek@cesmail.net> wrote:
> Badger wrote:
> > steve auvache wrote:
> >> I know.
> >> It is all to do with the new news server having a different numbering
> >> sequence from the old news server and me using "some" as a newsreader.
> >> My fault for being a user it seems.
> >
> > I'm glad it wasn't just me/Thunderbird.
> >
> Did I read somewhere that they sold out to BT?

Yep, and changes are taking place - no hosted newserver as above, now
subbed to Supernews.
They are censoring incoming mails now - certain words trigger their spam
filter and are immediately deleted - there is no option to opt out of
this.
An IT bod customer asked "what if one of my customers mails me with the
subject 'how do I stop wondercum mails?'"
At present this mail will be blackholed, so the recipient will not see
it, so his point was that his client would think he was being ignored,
thus he may lose a client because of this.

Their response was "no-one wants mail with 'wondercum' in the subject
line" and "if you dont like it, run your own mail server."
It seems they are quickly learning the art of Customer Relations from
their BT superiors.
Alan.
--
To reply by e-mail, change the ' + ' to 'plus'.

Timo Geusch

A.Lee wrote:

> If I hadnt got so many mail addresses given out, and my site hosted on
> there, I'd be after a new ISP.

Erm, if you're using your own domain for that, you should be able to
move that pretty much anywhere else. Heck, I've got server that's used
by people doing exactly that.

--
Morini Corsaro 125 | CB450K4 | XL250 Motosport x2 | 900SSD
Triumph T-Bird chop | K1100LT BOTAFOF #33 TWA#10
The UKRM FAQ: http://www.ukrm.net/faq/index.html
"Je profite du paysage" - Joe Bar

Rope

In article <1i2ahig.a1enauusmxp4N%alan@darkroom.+.com>, A.Lee wrote:
> A lot of peole have complained about this 'compulsory' deleting of
> certain mails, but they say more customers complain of spam, than
> complain about deleting mails, so they are carrying on, and you have no
> opt-out option.

*Bzzt* - wrong!

--
Rob_P
UKRM(at)indqualtec.co.uk
uppercase(d) BBIWYMC#1 BOG#11? MRO#31 IBCDBBB#1(kotl)
FJ1200, (in bits) CCM130 (need sharpening)
Atonal apples and amplified heat available now!

Rope

Steve auvache wrote:
> But they do have an opt out option.

Correct - and I think that business accounts are defaulted to opt-out,
whereas domestic accounts are defaulted to opt-in

> I do actually know how many of the
> emails sent to me are deleted by F9 and the number is zero. It is that
> from my personal choice because the bastards won't auto forward to
> spamcop direct from their servers so if I want to report spam I have to
> download the lot and turn it straight round again.

Eh?

I just stop mail collection from the F9 account and have spamkop collect
for me, and collect from spamkop instead.

--
Rob_P
UKRM(at)indqualtec.co.uk
uppercase(d) BBIWYMC#1 BOG#11? MRO#31 IBCDBBB#1(kotl)
FJ1200, (in bits) CCM130 (need sharpening)
Atonal apples and amplified heat available now!

A.Lee

Rope <spam@ukrm.net> wrote:

> In article <1i2ahig.a1enauusmxp4N%alan@darkroom.+.com>, A.Lee wrote:
> > A lot of peole have complained about this 'compulsory' deleting of
> > certain mails, but they say more customers complain of spam, than
> > complain about deleting mails, so they are carrying on, and you have no
> > opt-out option.
>
> *Bzzt* - wrong!

IIYF it is right.
There was a long thread about it on plusnet.service.customer-feedback
this week, and quote from a PN employee in that thread, answering
various queries -

> > Who are you to presume what is and what is not legit? Did nobody think
> > that you have crossed the line to censorship?
>
> We defended our stance that content filtering on specific words was
> slightly heavy handed for a number of months across the community.
> Despite this the consensus was in favour of us implementing this.
>
> It was something that a *lot* of people were asking for. We could offer
> it as an optional feature, yes but this would require far more
> development work.

So there is NO opt-out option for the spam that they filter by 'specific
words'.
I'm rather annoyed, as I'm still after a megadik - they sound really
good, you can keep it up all night, and spurt from one side of the room
to othe other. Women will love me.
Just need to get the emails again, so I can buy one.
Alan.

--
To reply by e-mail, change the ' + ' to 'plus'.

steve auvache

In article <VA.00002622.007eb0bd@ukrm.net>, Rope <spam@ukrm.net> writes
> Steve auvache wrote:
>> But they do have an opt out option.
>
>Correct - and I think that business accounts are defaulted to opt-out,
>whereas domestic accounts are defaulted to opt-in
>
>> I do actually know how many of the
>> emails sent to me are deleted by F9 and the number is zero. It is that
>> from my personal choice because the bastards won't auto forward to
>> spamcop direct from their servers so if I want to report spam I have to
>> download the lot and turn it straight round again.
>
>Eh?
>
>I just stop mail collection from the F9 account and have spamkop collect
>for me, and collect from spamkop instead.

I report to various destinations not just spamcop. I 100% report to
spamcop in an attempt to get some of the zombies taken out of the loop
and selectively report to various other agencies depending on the
content. An average spam email sent to me generates three and a bit
back out.

--
steve auvache
A Bloo one with built in safety features

christofire

steve auvache wrote:

> I report to various destinations not just spamcop. I 100% report to
> spamcop in an attempt to get some of the zombies taken out of the loop
> and selectively report to various other agencies depending on the
> content. An average spam email sent to me generates three and a bit
> back out.

Does that actually do anything for you? You said that deleting/ignoring
spam doesn't work, but if you're still getting thousands a day does
your approach work? If so, how?

--
Christofire DIAABTCOD#1 DS#9 ZX-10R

christofire

steve auvache wrote:

> The only way to beat the spammers is to make their efforts uneconomic.
> More reporting means more work for them and more work for them may
> eventually lead them to the conclusion that the business simply is not
> worth the effort but that won't happen until they are losing sleep or
> have been imprisoned. Delete and ignore will not achieve this either,
> more people becoming engaged in reporting will though.

How does reporting it make more work for the spammers? They get the
zombie networks, and if a few die there seem to be plenty more when the
next virus goes round.

> The biggest problem with report delete and ignore is that not enough
> people are doing it, yet.

That leads me to think it's not an easy process. If it's a case of
forwarding to an email address then great, if it requires more human
intervention than just clicking a button then it's more work than
deleting. Significantly more when you consider you can highlight all
the spam and then click delete.

--
Christofire DIAABTCOD#1 DS#9 ZX-10R

Colin Irvine

On Sat, 4 Aug 2007 20:36:00 +0000 (UTC), "christofire"
<chris@ukrm.org> squeezed out the following:

>steve auvache wrote:
>
>> It is a piece of piss.

It certainly is with a spamcop email address. I have a spamcop address
in my Thunderbird address book to which I forward all spam. I get an
email back from spamcop with a link to click to send the reports and
that's it.

>> > If it's a case of
>> > forwarding to an email address then great, if it requires more human
>> > intervention than just clicking a button then it's more work than
>> > deleting. Significantly more when you consider you can highlight all
>> > the spam and then click delete.
>>
>> Depends on the tools you use and the numbers you have to deal with.
>
>What tools though. Is there a simple plug-in that'll give me an extra
>button that says "Report highlighted spam!" (or a nice little picture)?
>If there isn't then it's more effort than I want to be bothered with
>and the bulk of people won't bother either.

Not a button, but very little effort (see above).

>> After the F9 webmail thing they offered us all new domains at their
>> expense, I shall be announcing a new domain to the world in due course
>> but there is no way I am going to have auvache.f9.co.uk turned off.
>> 50,000 automatic spam reports a month may only be a drop in the ocean
>> but it is individual drops what wear away rocks.
>
>So my idea of running it all through gmail first is a bad idea? That
>seems to get most of the spam straight off.

I used to run all my email through gmail for that reason. Nowadays I
want to receive all the spam so I can report it, so I've cancelled the
gmail account.

--
Colin Irvine
YZF1000R BOF#33 BONY#34 COFF#06 BHaLC#5
http://www.colinandpat.co.uk

Rope

In article <xn0f9k8aynfsmo000@news.motzarella.org>, Christofire wrote:
> What tools though. Is there a simple plug-in that'll give me an extra
> button that says "Report highlighted spam!" (or a nice little picture)?
> If there isn't then it's more effort than I want to be bothered with
> and the bulk of people won't bother either.

I use spamcop both at home and run the works account through it.

Simply stop collecting from your usual POP3 server, put your server &
account login into spamcop and it collects for you, auto-quarantines spam
and you can either have your mail client collect from the spamcop
account, or log in to their webmail interface, highlight the (few) spam
which gets through their filters and click [Report as Spam] - which I do
for my own account, or just collect it automatically (as I do for the
works account because so few now get through)

--
Rob_P
UKRM(at)indqualtec.co.uk
uppercase(d) BBIWYMC#1 BOG#11? MRO#31 IBCDBBB#1(kotl)
FJ1200, (in bits) CCM130 (need sharpening)
Atonal apples and amplified heat available now!

gbzzl

On Sat, 04 Aug 2007 14:38:59 +0100, Badger wrote:



> Again, not true, as Virgin use their own cables rather than the
> "standard" telephone cables which other broadband suppliers use.
>
>

Well not necessarily so, and not just an exception that breaks the rule,
the branded tesco, virgin and whatever services and now virginmedia
services were of course ntl available to non-cabled areas, I think they
called it ntl:freedom. I've had dial-up ntl, cable modem service from ntl
and for a couple of years since moving to a non-cabled area just straight
ntl adsl over a bt phone line.

In 2 years of adsl service from ntl over a bt phone line the service has
been to my knowledge 100% up, as reliable and it was remarkably reliable
as their cable modem service was, so the faults with this other lot,
whoever you are describing are probably not attributable to bt but to the
lower in the food chain providers concerned.

Oh yeah, billing and customer service and support are industry standard
abominable, I've heard. We expect nothing less than to put down the phone
to them a bit sadder, wiser and grayer than before. 512kbps (64K) down
256kbps (32K) up for £17.99 per month doesn't seem that competitive and
past offers to to upgrade to 1M at no extra cost were declined in order to
avoid re-negotiating or entering new contract terms which would tie me to
them for a set period, probably one year, rather than having the freedom
to cancel in order to switch elsewhere at will if desired, this has
backfired in the long run for me now as even the first year of a new
contract would have by now long expired and the situation would be exactly
the same but with the higher speed.

Having forgotten whatever the original topic was here, I'll just say this
is spectacularly OT, well done.