Will some kind soul who is a "Mac Head" please tell me ho to get rid
of all these spammy watch etc posts. I haven't got time to wade thru
all this stuff to get to the real RFC. I have a Mac running OS X
(Panther) and I access RFC through Google.
Thanks,
Lynn from Fargo

"Lynn from Fargo" > wrote in message
...
> Will some kind soul who is a "Mac Head" please tell me ho to get rid
> of all these spammy watch etc posts. I haven't got time to wade thru
> all this stuff to get to the real RFC. I have a Mac running OS X
> (Panther) and I access RFC through Google.
> Thanks,
> Lynn from Fargo

You can't killfile if you use Google Groups, as it is a web interface. Use
a newsreader. http://www.macorchard.com/usenet/

deja.blues wrote:

> "Lynn from Fargo" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Will some kind soul who is a "Mac Head" please tell me ho to get rid of
>> all these spammy watch etc posts. I haven't got time to wade thru all
>> this stuff to get to the real RFC. I have a Mac running OS X (Panther)
>> and I access RFC through Google. Thanks,
>> Lynn from Fargo
>
> You can't killfile if you use Google Groups, as it is a web interface.

The irony of a Google Groper complaining about spam that's mostly provided
by Google Gropers. Harf!


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

In article
>,
Lynn from Fargo > wrote:

> Will some kind soul who is a "Mac Head" please tell me ho to get rid
> of all these spammy watch etc posts. I haven't got time to wade thru
> all this stuff to get to the real RFC. I have a Mac running OS X
> (Panther) and I access RFC through Google.

I don't know if Google Groups even _has_ killfiles. You'd be better off
using a real newsreader, IMO.

I use MT-Newswatcher, have done for more than 10 years.

http://www.smfr.org/mtnw/

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases

"Blinky the Shark" > wrote in message
news
> deja.blues wrote:
>
>> "Lynn from Fargo" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Will some kind soul who is a "Mac Head" please tell me ho to get rid of
>>> all these spammy watch etc posts. I haven't got time to wade thru all
>>> this stuff to get to the real RFC. I have a Mac running OS X (Panther)
>>> and I access RFC through Google. Thanks,
>>> Lynn from Fargo
>>
>> You can't killfile if you use Google Groups, as it is a web interface.
>
> The irony of a Google Groper complaining about spam that's mostly provided
> by Google Gropers. Harf!

All that Mac Elitism is lost when one admits to using Google Groups. The
Internet doesn't care what OS you use , spam is for everyone!

deja.blues wrote:

>
> "Blinky the Shark" > wrote in message
> news
>> deja.blues wrote:
>>
>>> "Lynn from Fargo" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Will some kind soul who is a "Mac Head" please tell me ho to get rid
>>>> of all these spammy watch etc posts. I haven't got time to wade thru
>>>> all this stuff to get to the real RFC. I have a Mac running OS X
>>>> (Panther) and I access RFC through Google. Thanks, Lynn from Fargo
>>>
>>> You can't killfile if you use Google Groups, as it is a web interface.
>>
>> The irony of a Google Groper complaining about spam that's mostly
>> provided by Google Gropers. Harf!
>
> All that Mac Elitism is lost when one admits to using Google Groups. The
> Internet doesn't care what OS you use , spam is for everyone!

Hmmm. Come to think of it, while I've never thought about mapping GG
posters and OSs before, I wouldn't be surprised to find usage of the
GG posting interface to be Mac heavy -- at least with respect to
nonspammer GG posting.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:39:35 -0700, Blinky the Shark
> wrote:

>The irony of a Google Groper complaining about spam that's mostly provided
>by Google Gropers. Harf!
>
That's not nice, Blinky! Why punish legitimate posters? Guilt by
association isn't a valid argument. Some day you may be in a
situation where you'll need to use Google to post, so your words could
come back to bite you on the tail-fin.

IMO: Google does a great job of blocking spam in gmail. I wish they
would apply their spam blockers to Dejanews too. There are far more
legitimate users of the Google Interface than spammers - I refuse to
call it Google "Groups" because "google groups" encompasses more than
public Usenet. It implies "private" to me.



--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smile first

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:05:50 -0700 (PDT), Lynn from Fargo
> wrote:

>Will some kind soul who is a "Mac Head" please tell me ho to get rid
>of all these spammy watch etc posts. I haven't got time to wade thru
>all this stuff to get to the real RFC. I have a Mac running OS X
>(Panther) and I access RFC through Google.
>Thanks,
>Lynn from Fargo

If you're using Google, you're SOL. Get a real news reader, Lynn.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smile first

In article .net>,
Blinky the Shark > wrote:

> deja.blues wrote:
>
> >
> > "Blinky the Shark" > wrote in message
> > news
> >> deja.blues wrote:
> >>
> >>> "Lynn from Fargo" > wrote in message
> >>> ...
> >>>> Will some kind soul who is a "Mac Head" please tell me ho to get rid
> >>>> of all these spammy watch etc posts. I haven't got time to wade thru
> >>>> all this stuff to get to the real RFC. I have a Mac running OS X
> >>>> (Panther) and I access RFC through Google. Thanks, Lynn from Fargo
> >>>
> >>> You can't killfile if you use Google Groups, as it is a web interface.
> >>
> >> The irony of a Google Groper complaining about spam that's mostly
> >> provided by Google Gropers. Harf!
> >
> > All that Mac Elitism is lost when one admits to using Google Groups. The
> > Internet doesn't care what OS you use , spam is for everyone!
>
> Hmmm. Come to think of it, while I've never thought about mapping GG
> posters and OSs before, I wouldn't be surprised to find usage of the
> GG posting interface to be Mac heavy -- at least with respect to
> nonspammer GG posting.

Um, why?

Miche (Mac user)

--
Electricians do it in three phases

Miche wrote:

> In article .net>,
> Blinky the Shark > wrote:
>
>> deja.blues wrote:
>>
>>
>> > "Blinky the Shark" > wrote in message
>> > news >> >> deja.blues wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> "Lynn from Fargo" > wrote in message
>> >>> ...
>> >>>> Will some kind soul who is a "Mac Head" please tell me ho to get
>> >>>> rid of all these spammy watch etc posts. I haven't got time to
>> >>>> wade thru all this stuff to get to the real RFC. I have a Mac
>> >>>> running OS X (Panther) and I access RFC through Google. Thanks,
>> >>>> Lynn from Fargo
>> >>>
>> >>> You can't killfile if you use Google Groups, as it is a web
>> >>> interface.
>> >>
>> >> The irony of a Google Groper complaining about spam that's mostly
>> >> provided by Google Gropers. Harf!
>> >
>> > All that Mac Elitism is lost when one admits to using Google Groups.
>> > The Internet doesn't care what OS you use , spam is for everyone!
>>
>> Hmmm. Come to think of it, while I've never thought about mapping GG
>> posters and OSs before, I wouldn't be surprised to find usage of the GG
>> posting interface to be Mac heavy -- at least with respect to nonspammer
>> GG posting.
>
> Um, why?

Browser based; no configuration needed.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

wrote:

> On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:39:35 -0700, Blinky the Shark >
> wrote:
>
>>The irony of a Google Groper complaining about spam that's mostly
>>provided by Google Gropers. Harf!
>>
> That's not nice, Blinky! Why punish legitimate posters? Guilt by
> association isn't a valid argument. Some day you may be in a situation

Sleep with dogs; wake up with fleas.

> where you'll need to use Google to post, so your words could come back to
> bite you on the tail-fin.

No, I won't.

> IMO: Google does a great job of blocking spam in gmail. I wish they would
> apply their spam blockers to Dejanews too. There are far more legitimate
> users of the Google Interface than spammers - I refuse to call it Google
> "Groups" because "google groups" encompasses more than public Usenet. It
> implies "private" to me.

There is no longer any deja news; there is Google Groups. As for
"private", yes, that's what most GGers think they're using -- a Google
service.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

In article .net>,
Blinky the Shark > wrote:

> Miche wrote:
>
> > In article .net>,
> > Blinky the Shark > wrote:

> >> Hmmm. Come to think of it, while I've never thought about mapping GG
> >> posters and OSs before, I wouldn't be surprised to find usage of the GG
> >> posting interface to be Mac heavy -- at least with respect to nonspammer
> >> GG posting.
> >
> > Um, why?
>
> Browser based; no configuration needed.

Considering the number of Windows users who use Outlook or OE and IE
straight out of the box I don't think that's a particularly valid
observation to make.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases

In article .net>,
Blinky the Shark > wrote:


> Hmmm. Come to think of it, while I've never thought about mapping GG
> posters and OSs before, I wouldn't be surprised to find usage of the
> GG posting interface to be Mac heavy -- at least with respect to
> nonspammer GG posting.

You've got me curious. Why would you think that? Most of the Mac users
I've seen on newsgroups use GG only away from home.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Miche wrote:

> In article .net>,
> Blinky the Shark > wrote:
>
>> Miche wrote:
>>
>> > In article .net>,
>> > Blinky the Shark > wrote:
>
>> >> Hmmm. Come to think of it, while I've never thought about mapping GG
>> >> posters and OSs before, I wouldn't be surprised to find usage of the
>> >> GG posting interface to be Mac heavy -- at least with respect to
>> >> nonspammer GG posting.
>> >
>> > Um, why?
>>
>> Browser based; no configuration needed.
>
> Considering the number of Windows users who use Outlook or OE and IE
> straight out of the box I don't think that's a particularly valid
> observation to make.

Okay.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

Dan Abel wrote:

> In article .net>,
> Blinky the Shark > wrote:
>
>
>> Hmmm. Come to think of it, while I've never thought about mapping GG
>> posters and OSs before, I wouldn't be surprised to find usage of the GG
>> posting interface to be Mac heavy -- at least with respect to nonspammer
>> GG posting.
>
> You've got me curious. Why would you think that? Most of the Mac users
> I've seen on newsgroups use GG only away from home.

Oh, no particular reason, I guess.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

Following up to deja.blues

> You can't killfile if you use Google Groups, as it is a web interface. Use
> a newsreader. http://www.macorchard.com/usenet/

and kill google groups as a main source of spam, (whitelist goodies who
come from there).
--
"Mike....."(not "Mike")
remove clothing to email

On Apr 21, 11:47*pm, "deja.blues" > wrote:
> "Blinky the Shark" > wrote in
>
> > The irony of a Google Groper complaining about spam that's mostly provided
> > by Google Gropers. *Harf! *
>
> All that Mac Elitism is *lost when one admits to using Google Groups. *The
> Internet doesn't care what OS you use , spam is for everyone!
================================================== ==
I beg your pardons, oh collective gurus. I am not a mac elitist - I
just gave that information so that someone who is wiser and more
experienced than I would have any information s/he might need to help
me navigate my operating system to accomplish the task. Since the
1990s, the only access to RFC I have ever used has been Prairie
Public Broadcasting's North Dakota Network, AOL and Google.
Lynn in Fargo
Extremely well readt, but still a little computer illiterate

Lynn from Fargo > wrote:

> Will some kind soul who is a "Mac Head" please tell me ho to get rid
> of all these spammy watch etc posts.

Take that Mac and throw it out the window.

Problem solved.

-sw

Blinky the Shark > wrote:

> Hmmm. Come to think of it, while I've never thought about mapping GG
> posters and OSs before, I wouldn't be surprised to find usage of the
> GG posting interface to be Mac heavy -- at least with respect to
> nonspammer GG posting.

Out of 4,560 Google posts, 203 of them came from a Mac according to
their X-HTTP-UserAgent: header.

-sw

Sqwertz > wrote:

> Blinky the Shark > wrote:
>
>> Hmmm. Come to think of it, while I've never thought about mapping GG
>> posters and OSs before, I wouldn't be surprised to find usage of the
>> GG posting interface to be Mac heavy -- at least with respect to
>> nonspammer GG posting.
>
> Out of 4,560 Google posts, 203 of them came from a Mac according to
> their X-HTTP-UserAgent: header.

And just for kicks, 1011 of them came from AOL.

-sw

Sqwertz wrote:

> Blinky the Shark > wrote:
>
>> Hmmm. Come to think of it, while I've never thought about mapping GG
>> posters and OSs before, I wouldn't be surprised to find usage of the GG
>> posting interface to be Mac heavy -- at least with respect to nonspammer
>> GG posting.
>
> Out of 4,560 Google posts, 203 of them came from a Mac according to their
> X-HTTP-UserAgent: header.

I don't think there's any way to measure my "at least with respect to
nonspammer GG posting", as above. I wouldn't think many spammers would
be using Macs. Thanks for the raw stats, though.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

Blinky the Shark wrote:
> deja.blues wrote:
>
>> "Lynn from Fargo" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Will some kind soul who is a "Mac Head" please tell me ho to get rid of
>>> all these spammy watch etc posts. I haven't got time to wade thru all
>>> this stuff to get to the real RFC. I have a Mac running OS X (Panther)
>>> and I access RFC through Google. Thanks,
>>> Lynn from Fargo
>> You can't killfile if you use Google Groups, as it is a web interface.
>
> The irony of a Google Groper complaining about spam that's mostly provided
t> by Google Gropers. Harf!
>
>


People use what they have available and what they know.

Why blame Lynn for the spam generated by other users?
That's unkind.

gloria p

Gloria P wrote:

> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>> deja.blues wrote:
>>
>>> "Lynn from Fargo" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Will some kind soul who is a "Mac Head" please tell me ho to get rid
>>>> of all these spammy watch etc posts. I haven't got time to wade thru
>>>> all this stuff to get to the real RFC. I have a Mac running OS X
>>>> (Panther) and I access RFC through Google. Thanks, Lynn from Fargo
>>> You can't killfile if you use Google Groups, as it is a web interface.
>>
>> The irony of a Google Groper complaining about spam that's mostly
>> provided
> t> by Google Gropers. Harf!
>
> People use what they have available and what they know.
>
> Why blame Lynn for the spam generated by other users? That's unkind.

I didn't blame her for anybody's spam.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

Lynn from Fargo > wrote in

s.com:

> On Apr 21, 11:47*pm, "deja.blues" >
> wrote:
>> "Blinky the Shark" > wrote in
>>
>> > The irony of a Google Groper complaining about spam that's
>> > mostly provid
> ed
>> > by Google Gropers. *Harf! *
>>
>> All that Mac Elitism is *lost when one admits to using Google
>> Groups.
> *The
>> Internet doesn't care what OS you use , spam is for everyone!
> ================================================== =I beg your
> pardons, oh collective gurus. I am not a mac elitist - I just
> gave that information so that someone who is wiser and more
> experienced than I would have any information s/he might need
> to help me navigate my operating system to accomplish the
> task. Since the 1990s, the only access to RFC I have ever used
> has been Prairie Public Broadcasting's North Dakota Network,
> AOL and Google. Lynn in Fargo
> Extremely well readt, but still a little computer illiterate

I29.net?

If so ask them if they have usenet access.


If not there are some free usenet servers around.

I use the registered version of Agent. I have noticed that most of the
spam that is polluting NG's is jewelry related. Is there a way to use
certain words to weed out such posts (when setting up a kill file) or
does each post have to be killfiled individually?

Otis

I just found this on another one of my groups, posted by someone else:

Most of the newsgroups I read are becoming inundated with spam. I saw
a post
claiming a solution and followed its link, http://improve-usenet.org/.
This site
says that Google Groups is the conduit for a lot of spam hitting
usenet. I have
no connection with this site.

I¹d seen anti-Google Groups stuff before and ignored it. I use a
dedicated
newsgroups reader (MT-Newswatcher on Mac) but was never enough of a
purist to
care if others posted via Google or not. But the spam was getting to
me. So I
followed its instructions and added a filter to Newswatcher: Kill if
Message-ID
contains ³googlegroups.com².

Presto. The spam is gone. Some authentic, quality posts may be gone
too; I don¹t
know, thus I post this. I¹m sorry if I miss the value that you add to
this
group, but I need to keep this filter.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your two-cents??
Otis

Interesting article on help with kill filing

http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/killfile/

WL

Otis T. wrote:

> I just found this on another one of my groups, posted by someone else:
>
> Most of the newsgroups I read are becoming inundated with spam. I saw a
> post
> claiming a solution and followed its link, http://improve-usenet.org/.
> This site
> says that Google Groups is the conduit for a lot of spam hitting usenet.
> I have
> no connection with this site.
>
> I¹d seen anti-Google Groups stuff before and ignored it. I use a
> dedicated
> newsgroups reader (MT-Newswatcher on Mac) but was never enough of a
> purist to
> care if others posted via Google or not. But the spam was getting to me.
> So I
> followed its instructions and added a filter to Newswatcher: Kill if
> Message-ID
> contains ³googlegroups.com².
>
> Presto. The spam is gone. Some authentic, quality posts may be gone too;
> I don¹t
> know, thus I post this. I¹m sorry if I miss the value that you add to
> this
> group, but I need to keep this filter.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Your two-cents??

He engaged the right filter.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

In article .net>,
Blinky the Shark > wrote:

> Otis T. wrote:
>
> > I just found this on another one of my groups, posted by someone else:
> >
> > Most of the newsgroups I read are becoming inundated with spam. I saw a
> > post
> > claiming a solution and followed its link, http://improve-usenet.org/.
> > This site
> > says that Google Groups is the conduit for a lot of spam hitting usenet.
> > I have
> > no connection with this site.
> >
> > I¹d seen anti-Google Groups stuff before and ignored it. I use a
> > dedicated
> > newsgroups reader (MT-Newswatcher on Mac) but was never enough of a
> > purist to
> > care if others posted via Google or not. But the spam was getting to me.
> > So I
> > followed its instructions and added a filter to Newswatcher: Kill if
> > Message-ID
> > contains ³googlegroups.com².
> >
> > Presto. The spam is gone. Some authentic, quality posts may be gone too;
> > I don¹t
> > know, thus I post this. I¹m sorry if I miss the value that you add to
> > this
> > group, but I need to keep this filter.

> He engaged the right filter.

I don't see how this filter is going to help anything, except maybe to
boost your ego. Four minutes before he wrote this post, he made another
one in this very thread asking how to killfile spam in Forte. According
to the headers for the post above, it also was made using Forte.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Otis T. wrote:


> followed its instructions and added a filter to Newswatcher: Kill if
> Message-ID contains 3googlegroups.com2.

> Your two-cents??

I don't like domain filters. Too much "collateral damage" that blocks
perfectly reasonable contributors. I've had very good luck filtering on
keywords. I saw no spam this morning.



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

Default User > wrote in message
...
[snip]
> I don't like domain filters. Too much "collateral
> damage" that blocks perfectly reasonable contributors.
> I've had very good luck filtering on keywords.
> I saw no spam this morning.

Ditto those "commandments." Filtering on a whole domain _might_
be fine if you are willing to put up with the reasonable
posters but filtering on keywords has reaped me a bounty of
unmissed trash. Fer example: Synced up my 'groups and rfc had
125 new posts this morning. With my current filters grinding
away, I popped in to see 43 posts. I'm crushed I missed 82
messages touting wholesale watches for cheap designer purses
and jordon nike shoes for sex with jesus and mohamed earning
money and gold in china.

YMMV,

The Ranger
--
Microsoft gambled that making their users fault-tolerant was a
better use of resources than making their software reliable.
-- Paul Guertin, alt.peeves, 3/20/01

Dan Abel wrote:

> In article .net>,
> Blinky the Shark > wrote:
>
>> Otis T. wrote:
>>
>> > I just found this on another one of my groups, posted by someone else:
>> >
>> > Most of the newsgroups I read are becoming inundated with spam. I saw
>> > a post
>> > claiming a solution and followed its link, http://improve-usenet.org/.
>> > This site
>> > says that Google Groups is the conduit for a lot of spam hitting
>> > usenet. I have
>> > no connection with this site.
>> >
>> > I¹d seen anti-Google Groups stuff before and ignored it. I use a
>> > dedicated
>> > newsgroups reader (MT-Newswatcher on Mac) but was never enough of a
>> > purist to
>> > care if others posted via Google or not. But the spam was getting to
>> > me. So I
>> > followed its instructions and added a filter to Newswatcher: Kill if
>> > Message-ID
>> > contains ³googlegroups.com².
>> >
>> > Presto. The spam is gone. Some authentic, quality posts may be gone
>> > too; I don¹t
>> > know, thus I post this. I¹m sorry if I miss the value that you add to
>> > this
>> > group, but I need to keep this filter.
>
>> He engaged the right filter.
>
> I don't see how this filter is going to help anything, except maybe to
> boost your ego.

I think ridding himself of the GG crap was his real motivation.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

The Ranger wrote:

> Default User > wrote in message
> ... [snip]
>> I don't like domain filters. Too much "collateral damage" that blocks
>> perfectly reasonable contributors. I've had very good luck filtering on
>> keywords. I saw no spam this morning.
>
> Ditto those "commandments." Filtering on a whole domain _might_ be fine if
> you are willing to put up with the reasonable posters but filtering on
> keywords has reaped me a bounty of unmissed trash. Fer example: Synced up
> my 'groups and rfc had 125 new posts this morning. With my current filters
> grinding away, I popped in to see 43 posts. I'm crushed I missed 82
> messages touting wholesale watches for cheap designer purses and jordon
> nike shoes for sex with jesus and mohamed earning money and gold in china.

Keyword filtering can be summed up as "try to keep up with new kinds of
spam by continually fiddling with your rules". I kinda like "set the
right filter, leave it alone, and enjoy Usenet".


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

Blinky the Shark > wrote in message
news
> The Ranger wrote:
>> Ditto those "commandments." Filtering on a whole
>> domain _might_ be fine if you are willing to put up
>> with the reasonable posters but filtering on keywords
>> has reaped me a bounty of unmissed trash. Fer
>> example: Synced up my 'groups and rfc had 125
>> new posts this morning. With my current filters grinding
>> away, I popped in to see 43 posts. I'm crushed I
>> missed 82 messages touting wholesale watches for
>> cheap designer purses and jordon nike shoes for sex
>> with jesus and mohamed earning money and gold
>> in china.
>>
> Keyword filtering can be summed up as "try to keep
> up with new kinds of spam by continually fiddling with
> your rules". I kinda like "set the right filter, leave it
> alone, and enjoy Usenet".

You say "either" and I say "either"
You say "neither" I say "neither"
"Either" "either", "neither" "neither"

Let's call the whole thing off

You say "potato," I say "patattah"
You say "tomato", I say "creole tomata"

Oh, let's call the whole thing off
Oh, if we call the whole thing off

Then we must part and oh
If we ever part, that would break my heart
So, I say "ursta" you say "oyster"
I'm not gonna stop eatin' urstas just cause you say oyster,

Oh, let's call the whole thing off

Oh, I say "pajamas", you say "pajamas"
Sugar, what's the problem?
Oh, for we know we need each other so

We'd better call the calling off off
So let's call it off, oh let's call it off
Oh, let's call it off, baby let's call it off

Sugar why don't we call it off,
I'm talking baby why call it off
Call it off!

Let's call the whole thing off

Blinky the Shark wrote:


> Keyword filtering can be summed up as "try to keep up with new kinds
> of spam by continually fiddling with your rules". I kinda like "set
> the right filter, leave it alone, and enjoy Usenet".

As long as you don't mind blocking people who have done nothing but
have the "wrong" news service or email address. I haven't updated the
filter list since last some time. It only takes a few seconds when I
do. XanaNews allows chaining filters with OR, so I just add a new
keyword on the front of the already established rule. Easy, and no
collateral damage.



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

Default User wrote:

> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
>
>> Keyword filtering can be summed up as "try to keep up with new kinds of
>> spam by continually fiddling with your rules". I kinda like "set the
>> right filter, leave it alone, and enjoy Usenet".
>
> As long as you don't mind blocking people who have done nothing but have
> the "wrong" news service or email address.

Doesn't bother me a bit. Lie with pigs; wake up muddy.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

Blinky the Shark wrote:

> Default User wrote:

> > As long as you don't mind blocking people who have done nothing but
> > have the "wrong" news service or email address.
>
> Doesn't bother me a bit. Lie with pigs; wake up muddy.

To each his own. There are other ways to accomplish the task.



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

Janet Baraclough wrote:

> The message >
> from "Default User" > contains these words:
>
> > Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
>
> > > Keyword filtering can be summed up as "try to keep up with new
> > > kinds of spam by continually fiddling with your rules". I kinda
> > > like "set the right filter, leave it alone, and enjoy Usenet".
>
> > As long as you don't mind blocking people who have done nothing but
> > have the "wrong" news service or email address.
>
> ? I've never seen a news service called nike or an email
> address@bagsandboots.

Blinky is advocating blocking googlegroups.com. Others (Dave Bugg) go
for gmail.com.




Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

> Sqwertz > wrote:
>
>> Blinky the Shark > wrote:
>>
>>> Hmmm. Come to think of it, while I've never thought about mapping GG
>>> posters and OSs before, I wouldn't be surprised to find usage of the
>>> GG posting interface to be Mac heavy -- at least with respect to
>>> nonspammer GG posting.
>>
>> Out of 4,560 Google posts, 203 of them came from a Mac according to
>> their X-HTTP-UserAgent: header.
>
> And just for kicks, 1011 of them came from AOL.
>
> -sw

Yikes. I'm reading and posting this from emacs, and I feel a little
out of place at the moment. Mac elitism doesn't have anything on us
unix terminal whores.

-Nat

The Ranger wrote:
> Blinky the Shark > wrote in message
> news
>> The Ranger wrote:
>>> Ditto those "commandments." Filtering on a whole
>>> domain _might_ be fine if you are willing to put up
>>> with the reasonable posters but filtering on keywords
>>> has reaped me a bounty of unmissed trash. Fer
>>> example: Synced up my 'groups and rfc had 125
>>> new posts this morning. With my current filters grinding
>>> away, I popped in to see 43 posts. I'm crushed I
>>> missed 82 messages touting wholesale watches for
>>> cheap designer purses and jordon nike shoes for sex
>>> with jesus and mohamed earning money and gold
>>> in china.
>>>
>> Keyword filtering can be summed up as "try to keep
>> up with new kinds of spam by continually fiddling with
>> your rules". I kinda like "set the right filter, leave it
>> alone, and enjoy Usenet".
>
> You say "either" and I say "either"
> You say "neither" I say "neither"
> "Either" "either", "neither" "neither"
>
> Let's call the whole thing off
>
> You say "potato," I say "patattah"
> You say "tomato", I say "creole tomata"
>
> Oh, let's call the whole thing off
> Oh, if we call the whole thing off
>
> Then we must part and oh
> If we ever part, that would break my heart
> So, I say "ursta" you say "oyster"
> I'm not gonna stop eatin' urstas just cause you say oyster,
>
> Oh, let's call the whole thing off
>
> Oh, I say "pajamas", you say "pajamas"
> Sugar, what's the problem?
> Oh, for we know we need each other so
>
> We'd better call the calling off off
> So let's call it off, oh let's call it off
> Oh, let's call it off, baby let's call it off
>
> Sugar why don't we call it off,
> I'm talking baby why call it off
> Call it off!
>
> Let's call the whole thing off
>
>

You forgot to add...

The Flaming Ranger