On Feb 11, 9:24*pm, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> It is very easy
> to just filter the domain. Considering the vast amount of spam that
> sometimes gets out of hand and the trolls bombing runs *that come from
> gmail and the number of legitimate gmail users, there is relatively
> little collateral damage.- Hide quoted text -

However, it depends where you set the kill. I have my gmail as
sending (therefore reply) address even though I`m actually sending
from my Rogers account. So killfiling the domain would also remove my
legitimate (except for my reply address) notes. Using gmail means
that I don't need to use a munge or those awful NOSPAM in the address
crap.

Just pointing out a flaw to your otherwise cunning plan.

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 09:21:05 -0800 (PST), wrote:
>
> > On Feb 11, 9:24*pm, Dave Smith
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> It is very easy
> >> to just filter the domain. Considering the vast amount of spam that
> >> sometimes gets out of hand and the trolls bombing runs *that come from
> >> gmail and the number of legitimate gmail users, there is relatively
> >> little collateral damage.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > However, it depends where you set the kill. I have my gmail as
> > sending (therefore reply) address even though I`m actually sending
> > from my Rogers account. So killfiling the domain would also remove my
> > legitimate (except for my reply address) notes. Using gmail means
> > that I don't need to use a munge or those awful NOSPAM in the address
> > crap.
> >
> > Just pointing out a flaw to your otherwise cunning plan.
>
> what is awful about putting NOSPAM or some other confounding characters
> that are easily recognizable to human beings but not machines? i don't
> understand your complaint.

Having done some programming before, it isn't hard to get software to
recognize the word "nospam" and remove it.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:51:13 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 09:21:05 -0800 (PST), wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 11, 9:24*pm, Dave Smith
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> It is very easy
>>>> to just filter the domain. Considering the vast amount of spam that
>>>> sometimes gets out of hand and the trolls bombing runs *that come from
>>>> gmail and the number of legitimate gmail users, there is relatively
>>>> little collateral damage.- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> However, it depends where you set the kill. I have my gmail as
>>> sending (therefore reply) address even though I`m actually sending
>>> from my Rogers account. So killfiling the domain would also remove my
>>> legitimate (except for my reply address) notes. Using gmail means
>>> that I don't need to use a munge or those awful NOSPAM in the address
>>> crap.
>>>
>>> Just pointing out a flaw to your otherwise cunning plan.
>>
>> what is awful about putting NOSPAM or some other confounding characters
>> that are easily recognizable to human beings but not machines? i don't
>> understand your complaint.
>
> Having done some programming before, it isn't hard to get software to
> recognize the word "nospam" and remove it.

sure, but there are other characters you can use, if you're at all clever.
and frankly, i don't think your garden-variety email address harvester is
going to spend a whole lot of time programming around it. i could be
wrong, though.

your pal,
blake