Jump to content

Evidence of spam reduction


Simon

Recommended Posts

- especially if the ISP has a good spam filter.

In defense of my ISP, my volume of spam is "my fault". Looking at the historical volume changes last Nov 05-Jan 06, Apr-May 06, and Jul 06 these were times when I was working with my ISP to get all of their filters turned off for me.

Why I wanted this is due to my geekdum and several missing messages (yes Miss Betsy, they just dumped them in the bit bucket and didn't tell anyone).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why I wanted this is due to my geekdum and several missing messages (yes Miss Betsy, they just dumped them in the bit bucket and didn't tell anyone).

This seems to be increasingly the policy of many ISP's & hosts. When I complained to my domain host that I was missing many wanted emails they first admitted that they were using the SCBL to block 'spam' then reluctantly agreed to change it to 'tag', but didn't forward any tagged mail to a user accessible folder, (so I'm not sure what is going on now....), and in addition are also using a separate content based spam filter of some sort, once again not user configurable so emails are just going missing (as you say - straight into the bit-bucket), and no-one is any the wiser.... I suppose you can't blame them, especially if they are going to be penalised for sending NDR's, but as far as I am concerned it renders the email account even more useless than if it is clogged with spam.... It's a bit like your postman throwing away every third envelope at random....

I would far prefer to have a clean, unfiltered email account so I can institute my own filters & checks. I don't mind an ISP or host having a spamfilter to protect & reduce the load on their mailservers, (although in my experience some spamfiltering seems to slow down mailserver operation dramatically), as long as it is user accessible/configurable and/or offers the opportunity for the user to whitelist his address.

As an aside, it occurs to me that one problem with IP blocking is that with the explosion of zombie botnets there are no definite 'rogue' IP ranges anymore - most IP ranges seem to be affected at some time or other. I know ISP's should better monitor for zombie activity but I appreciate how difficult it is for the larger ISP's especially if they use dynamic user IP allocation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... but I appreciate how difficult it is for the larger ISP's especially if they use dynamic user IP allocation.

Yes they have a problem. I see a parallel to the old Beta/VHS argument. A large number of (most) email customers do not want to deal with filters, whitelist, etc. so we have settled into a less than technically ideal solution. In todays marketplace ISPs are trying to filter out the spam for users that say "don't send me that cr*p." In todays market place the ISPs that don't filter loose.

The public has grown to expect failures from computers, due to poorly written OS(s) and apps, and so they accept missing emails as normal. When you try to explain the alternative their eyes glass over.

I have found a host for my domain that I can work with. The only trouble is those that are maintaining the systems and dealing with the spam problem are not customer support. They don't always remember that I want something different (I don't think they understand eather.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The public has grown to expect failures from computers, due to poorly written OS(s) and apps, and so they accept missing emails as normal. When you try to explain the alternative their eyes glass over.

Until it really becomes economically important to the consumer to choose an ISP who is responsible (or someone like Ralph Nader or Rachel Carson awakes them), even intelligent people don't want to hear how simple it is.

Miss Betsy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until it really becomes economically important to the consumer to choose an ISP who is responsible (or someone like Ralph Nader or Rachel Carson awakes them), even intelligent people don't want to hear how simple it is.

Ralph Nader, Rachael Carson...pshaw. We need Oprah!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You lost me.

What does browsers have to do with ... this?

Opera is another browser: http://www.opera.com/

It was a joke, that was missed by some of it's audience.

P.S. Opera used to be text-only, correct, or am I losing more of those brain cells? Sorry, it was Lynx I was thinking of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...