To: WSFAlist at keithlynch.net Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 10:01:21 -0400 Subject: [WSFA] Re: Spam Observation From: ronkean at juno.com Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org> On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 22:25:32 -0400 "Ted White" <twhite8 at cox.net> writes: > > I don't bother with filters; running my eye down my queue is > entirely > sufficient. Today I've deleted 21 pieces of spam. > 21 per day sounds hardly more than a minor annoyance. But there is an email problem which I find more annoying than spam - namely messages (most often from legitimate senders) which disrupt the operation of the computer. For example, when someone sends me a message consisting of a copied web page, it sometimes happens that a dialog window about scripts pops up. Repeated efforts to close the window result in a new window popping up, and it is impossible to accomplish any other action while a dialog window is awaiting a response. So I have to reboot the computer. A similar problem often accompanies mail from Israel, where the computer is unable to read the message or the attachment. I get only a few spam messages per day, usually less than ten, and I've been using the same juno address for nearly 8 years. Today, I downloaded 102 messages in the first tranche, and just one of them was spam. Three messages were ads from juno. Also, it seems like I'm getting less spam now as compared with a few months ago. Could it be that Juno started filtering? It appears that Juno does not filter incoming messages for spam, because such filtering is nowhere mentioned in the extensive information about Juno's anti-spam efforts which can be viewed at www.juno.com. Those efforts consist of suing spammers, especially those who forge juno addresses, and applying strict rules against outgoing spam from juno users, and not having open relays. It is nearly impossible to spam using juno, because if a user sends out more than 20 messages in a session, they get an automatic warning message, and if a user attempts to send more than 50 messages the account gets blocked. It would seem to be a good idea for legitimate ISPs to impose such automatic limits by default, only allowing those users who can demonstrate a legitimate need to send bulk mail to have higher limits. But of course if all ISPs were 'legitimate', spam would be much less a problem anyway. Perhaps one reason I get so little spam is that I usually use a throwaway juno address when I am asked to provide an email address in a commercial situation, such as filling out a mail-in rebate form. I check mail at the throwaway address once a month or so, and that address actually gets less spam than my main address, even though I have been using the same throwaway address for several years. But the throwaway address does get plenty of ads from some of the companies to which I had directly provided the address. Given that I provided the address, I don't count those ads as spam so long as the business is legitimate enough that it could be expected to honor a remove request, and if it makes the removal process easy. For example, from a German company I downloaded some free software which makes animated movies depicting gas molecule motion. I'm glad I gave them my throwaway address instead of the main one, because for years afterwards they sent ads to that address. Ron Kean . ________________________________________________________________