- From: zargon <zargonmaster@comcast.net>
- Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 00:14:46 -0500
- To: "Martin E" <espmartin@hotmail.com>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
Ditto what YOU said Martin!!!! I get upwards of 1k + spam every day... sometimes more. I use OSX - mail.app (Panther) The mail.app catches 99% of all the spam... but I keep getting the crap on *.w3.org from those two aforementioned virus senders. I don't get the virus.. .I don't open any attachments. I allow only text email.. NO html. I have special filters for www-html@w3.org... the spam still slips through to my mail-list mailbox. Sure glad I don't do WindoZe. And yes... ONE more time... ADMIN... where are you???? I thought that this list was moderated... at least every once in a while. Admin must be on vacation. Or mabey he got deleted by the new Mydoom ? :-) At any rate.... I too agree something must be done at the LIST level. Martin... maybe you could volunteer to write the Admin a simple script for filtering this crap OFF the list. Sincerely, Zargon Somewhere in HotLanta On Feb 28, 2004, at 10:55 PM, Martin E wrote: Hello Kurtis and List (sorry for the top-posting), Yes, I run filters. Yes, I have anti-virus/firewall/spam/spyware software running as well. The point is, this can (and should) be caught on the /admin/ level. The List Admin should be aware of what passes through his/her network, whether it be the sys admin checking the firewall (Cisco PIX is my fav.) logs - noting the _should_not_be_allowed_anyway_ executables (containing virus strings that can be searched for), or the web master moderating (or just the occasional check see) the list for just such an occasion as this. Let's say: I offered you, a Golden Labrador, an account on my Pure Breed Dog List. I also allowed Cat Pornography to pass through - on a much more frequent basis than your highly anticipated post on the /perils of non-licensed Dog Groomers/, I bet you'd want to be the /one/ to schedule my vet. appointment for spaying! Bottom-line is that this list /can/ be a 99% safe place for the rash and hurried, /I got new mail, I gotta open it up!!!/ - not needing to double-think that the msg is spoofed and contains a harmful, data eating virus. Anyway, that's how I see it. Martin /dog-lover/ E. ----- Original Message ----- From: Kurtis Kroon To: www-html@w3.org Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 6:07 PM Subject: Re: Admin, filter this guy off!!! If you use Mac OS X Mail, you can set up a rule to filter out specific senders. If you use Windows Outlook (not sure about Express), you can set up a rule to filter out specific senders. If you use a different client, you *should* be able to set up a rule .. but I'm not sure, because I only use these two (Outlook at work and Mail at home) Alternatively, you may consider giving SpamFire a try: I just installed it, set to "Merciless" mode (I like that it has a mode named "Merciless"), and I'll see how it does. (It was part of Ten for X -- Mac OS X, that is -- but it was available for Windows, too). Kurtis On Feb 28, 2004, at 3:11 AM, Wingnut wrote: > > Niklas Wahlberg wrote: > >> I totally agree, thank you! >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Martin E [mailto:espmartin@hotmail.com] >> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 5:15 PM >> To: www-html@w3.org >> Subject: Re: Admin, filter this guy off!!! >> Sorry, the dsr@w3.org sender - that dork!!!! >> Spammer - _and_please_do_not_open_his/her_attachments!!!! >> ----- Original Message ----- From: Martin E To: www-html@w3.org Sent: >> Friday, February 27, 2004 2:13 PM >> Subject: Admin, filter this guy off!!! >> Someone (List Admin?) get this dork black listed (off this >> list!!!!!!!!) > > ij@w3.org is weird too. And I saw a bbos@w3.org come a spammin' thru > recently, too. This is not good cuz Bert is a hero of mine, so anyone > who corrupts Bert's name... is on my hit list. :) > > I'm at or over 50% spam from w3.org. This, and the complaints of lost > posts (I lost 2 from the style maillist last month)... could be looked > into. While we're at it, lets look into ALL aspects of the w3c to see > what unwanted influences are affecting it and its reputation. And > let's keep in mind the difference between trolling and healthy > scrutiny. > > Wing > > >
Received on Sunday, 29 February 2004 00:16:16 UTC