Developer Forum

AWS> However, some mailing list managers (like Mailman) can already do this.

S> And that's why the mailing list vendor I use does not have this
S> "feature" enabled in mailman. Customization maybe a fine thing for
S> Aunt Matilda's and Uncle Zeke's family mailing list, with ten
S> subscribers, but it quickly stops being fun soon thereafter.

"Customisation" of the message body on a per-recipient basis is largely
irrelevant to public mailing lists where more than just one entity can
post to the list (and indeed is just as _bad_ an idea as modifying
Reply-To: and modifying Subject: are). However, customisation of the
message _envelope_ on a per-recipient basis is very useful to all sorts
of mailing lists, as it permits the mailing list software to
automatically detect and unsubscribe the subscriber mailbox names to
which mail cannot be (possibly indirectly) delivered.

<URL: http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ;

SC> He also said:
SC>
SC> "Here, your objective is to distract people's attention from SPF."

... when, of course, it is readily apparent from reading the actual post
that my objective was to continue the discussion at hand about mailing
lists and header munging. Alan's objective, conversely, was no doubt to
derail that discussion, because it had utterly demolished his daft idea
about headers and envelopes being required to match and the elimination
of the Blind Carbon Copy mechanism. (People who have been paying
attention over the past year or so will realise that Alan wants to
legitimise these foolish notions because then that will justify the
broken behaviour of the UBM-sending mail software that he purveys, which
throws away mail that uses blind carbon copying.) Hence the change of
subject, the non sequitur, the (vain) attempts to goad, and (as a backup
strategy) the sock puppet - all to get people talking about something
else other than the sheer stupidity of his idea, given the way that
mailing lists and other things actually work.

S> Ding Ding Ding, we have another kook on the loose, or just a really
S> stupid person.

No, it's not another kook. It's the same kook. It's almost certainly
merely another one-time sock puppet of Alan's, popping up and taking his
side. He has produced one every few months, in various fora (from
survivalism to Buddhism, Google Groups reveals), to bolster his "The
lurkers agree with me in e-mail." claims. Notice the same writing
style, the same NNTP server (He's found a German one that provides him
with more anonymity, which his other long-term aliases in other
newsgroups have been using for a few months now.), and the same attacks
on the be du jour (which is Morley at the moment).

<URL: http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ./nanae/kooks/alanconnor.shtml#SockPuppets>

Of course, you will also notice Alan once again exhibiting his
"Killfiled for 90 seconds" policy of killfiling me on 2004-09-13 and
then ten days later on 2004-09-23 reading one of my posts and replying
to it.

<URL: http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ./nanae/kooks/alanconnor.shtml#KillfiledFor>

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:43:04 GMT, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard




My initials are "AC" *moron*.


Yes. A spammer would definitely not like those ideas.

There. I've read enough of your garbage for one day.

Say whatever you want, you *petty criminal*, but you can't get
your trash in my mailbox.

You may now kiss my ass and shut your lying mouth.

<snip>

AC

--
Pass-list --> Block-list --> Challenge-Response
The key to taking control of your mailboxes
http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ://tinyurl.com/2t5kp
http://www.yqcomputer.com/

XXXX@XXXXX.COM (global village idiot Alan Connor) writes:

What are you, 12? Take your ball and go home. *
--
* PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
like corkscrews.

"pv+ XXXX@XXXXX.COM (Paul Vader)" wrote in news.admin.net-abuse.email:


Which one has he still got, the left or right one?

--
Randolf Richardson, pro-active spam fighter - XXXX@XXXXX.COM
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Please do not eMail me directly when responding to my
postings in the newsgroups.

Sending eMail to other SMTP servers is a privilege.

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 17:06:34 -0000, Paul Vader


<snip>

You can say what you want. Talk's cheap. But the spammers can't
get even one spam into my mailbox. They can't even make me aware
of the fact they tried.

Spam is only a problem for incompetents. If you are having
a problem with it, YOU are incompetent.

AC

--
Pass-list --> Block-list --> Challenge-Response
The key to taking control of your mailboxes
http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ://tinyurl.com/2t5kp
http://www.yqcomputer.com/

In article <lVx5d.10278$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,



You repeatedly posts extracts from logfiles showing all spam messages
that you have received from the spammers (acknowledging to them that
you receive mail on the address they used) and filed away in /dev/null.

The fact that you post these logfile extracts clearly shows that you
are aware of attempts to send spam to you.

--
Gan Larsson http://www.yqcomputer.com/

SM> [...] if everyone receives a potentially slightly different copy,
they can
SM> receive the mail with the Bcc stipped, whereas the guy who's mentioned
SM> on the Bcc can receive a copy that includes himself in the Cc (or that
SM> simply still has the Bcc field unstripped).

Those MUAs that do this sort of thing generally do it the other way
around. One version of the message, containing only the "To:" and "Cc:"
fields, is sent to all of the non-blind recipients; and each of the
blind recipients receives a separate individually tailored version
containing, in addition, a "Bcc:" field appropriate to that recipient.

On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 15:33:14 GMT, Goran Larsson




Three times ever.


I don't receive them. They go to the bit bucket, not a
file.


/dev/null is the bit bucket. They aren't saved anywhere.


I rarely check the logs, Goran.

No need to, except when I want to hassle the spammers who
hang out here.

A remarkably stupid post.

I hope your Saab runs better than your mind.


--
Pass-list --> Block-list --> Challenge-Response
The key to taking control of your mailboxes
http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ://tinyurl.com/2t5kp
http://www.yqcomputer.com/

In article <gGB5d.3743$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,



Isn't three times a repetition?


You have to receive them to throw them away. My mail server, on
the other hand, does not receive spams. It just refuses to receive
them.


Why do you think you have to tell us this?


Even if you check them rarely you are still aware of the spams
they have sent you.


I am quite sure that no spammer has felt hassled by you. They are
most likely not even aware that you exist.


Yes, but why did you post it if it was stupid?


Did you run out of arguments? Is this the debate level you prefer?

--
Gan Larsson http://www.yqcomputer.com/

* Goran Larsson < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > [comp.mail.misc]:
<snip>

Can I ask how you do this? Do you run a mail server yourself?
I would imagine this is not an option for those of us who are just
end-users running a cron fetchmail to download mail from ISP, but if it
is possible, I would like to implement.

<snip>

--
T R O Y P I G G I N S
e : XXXX@XXXXX.COM

This is a MIME GnuPG-signed message. If you see this text, it means that
your E-mail or Usenet software does not support MIME signed messages.

Troy Piggins writes:


Obviously.


Don't do that. This is theoretically doable, but all you'll end up doing is
bouncing spam to the forged return address, annoying people, and generating
complaints to your ISP.

In other words, you'll become a Beavis.

If you're using your ISP for mail services, you're at your ISP's mercy as
far as spam filtering is concerned. That's the way it goes.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBBV02Sx9p3GYHlUOIRAhj0AJ4gEzFCfUAB4zopIZSaTvvsT068MACeMiQF
/7fybwezdFzlx2SrUI0uNk4=
=owtw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 22:49:50 GMT, Troy Piggins < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >





You can't, Troy. You have to be running the MTA that delivers
the mail to your POP or IMAP server.

The closest you can get is to download the headers from you POP
or IMAP server, identify the obvious spam from them, and delete
them on the server.

(Unless you get your own domain and run your own mailserver...)

AC



--
Pass-list --> Block-list --> Challenge-Response
The key to taking control of your mailboxes
http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ://tinyurl.com/2t5kp
http://www.yqcomputer.com/

From: Alan Connor < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >

Enough said, munge-boi.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr

* Alan Connor < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > [comp.mail.misc]:


Yeah, thought so.

--
T R O Y P I G G I N S
e : XXXX@XXXXX.COM
Try your luck. Roll the dice :
# [$[RANDOM%6]=1] && \rm -rf / &