In article <fo5dip$fkk$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Keith F. Lynch <kfl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> That's sad. You're letting the spammers win.
>
>> How so? I'm not responding to their bait.
>
>You're letting the spammers cut us off from each other. Their
>intention may not be to shut down email between people who don't
>already know each other, but it's the most obvious bad effect
>of their actions.
They're not cutting me off from anybody I want to hear from. If
I recognize the sender and/or the subject line, I read the mail.
If I don't recognize the sender but the subject line looks
interesting, I read it too. If I don't recognize the sender (or
I DO, to its detriment) and the subject line is obviously in
non-ASCII characters, or is an invitation to Make! Money! Fast!
or to enlarge an organ I haven't got, I delete it unread. I
glance at the list of names/subjects every time I log in, and I
can tell in a second or two that nothing on it deserves reading,
and I apply the dreaded D STAR.
>
>My point was that I can get email from people I "know" but don't
>remember. You, apparently, cannot. That's not "working" if "working"
>is defined as missing few if any non-spam emails that are sent to you.
I don't think I miss any non-spam emails that are sent to me (if
there are any). I described what I do: I think I catch every
instance of a real human being with a real message that way.
>
>The vast majority of people on my whitelist have never sent me email.
>But they might, and I don't want to miss it if they do.
If you like to go that way, do. In effect with your whitelist
you're blacklisting the entire human race except the people on
your whitelist -- many of whom have never sent you mail and
probably never will. If you feel better about it that way, do
it. I bet I spend less time, less energy, and experience less
angst in glancing over my list of messages (there's a command
"from" in my .chsrc file that prints it out automatically at each
login) and hitting the dread D STAR than you do maintaining your
whitelist. Suum cuique.
>
>> For me, what works is to type "mail," to look at the list of sender
>> ids and subject lines, and MAYBE to look at one or two, but mostly
>> to type "d *" and "q".
>
>I understand that bayesian filtering works well for people who get not
>more than a few thousand spams per day. You might look into that.
/googles bayesian filtering
Oh good grief, now you want me to study higher mathematics. Read
what I said above about saving time, energy, and angst.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djheydt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
