stopping spam

It seems like if every person responded to every piece of spam those recieving it would mnot be able to figure out which ones were real responses to what they wanted to sell.
Is there a reason this wouldn't work?
--
Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

Kraig Grady wrote:

>It seems like if every person responded to every piece of spam those >recieving it would mnot be able to figure out which ones were real >responses to what they wanted to sell.
> Is there a reason this wouldn't work?
> >
I use Thunderbird and tag each one as junk mail.
Then the next one ends in the junk mail folder and I never see it again.

--
* David Beardsley
* microtonal guitar
* http://biink.com/db

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:
>
Wouldn't this encourage the spammers to increase their
e-mails to you? S. Szpak

> It seems like if every person responded to every piece of spam
those
> recieving it would mnot be able to figure out which ones were real
> responses to what they wanted to sell.
> Is there a reason this wouldn't work?
> --
> Kraig Grady
> North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
> The Wandering Medicine Show
> KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles
>

> It seems like if every person responded to every piece of spam
> those recieving it would mnot be able to figure out which ones
> were real responses to what they wanted to sell. Is there a
> reason this wouldn't work?

Most spam relies on the recipient clicking a link in it, not
on a reply. Other spam is just to check for bounces -- they
validate that your address is working. Most spammers have no
way of recieving mail at the addresses they send from. (I speak
from experience, having briefly worked for one of the largest
spammers in the US -- a company called Jumpstart in San Francisco,
which sent 40M messages every week, and apparently just went
out of business.) Nevertheless, it's wise never to reply to
a spammer.

The good news is, as David points out, statistical filters of
just the right kind work extremely well -- so well you might
get hundreds of spam messages a week and only have to worry about
1 or 2 a month. Very few end-user products have the latest
kind of filter, though. I dunno about Thunderbird... The open
source CRM114 filter is one of the best (you have to be a unix
geek to install it)...

http://crm114.sourceforge.net/

...but there is an easy-to-install version of it for Eudora...

http://spamnix.com/

...which I've been using with good results.

The spam filtering in Gmail apears to be very good... much
better than hotmail or Yahoo mail. Then again, Gmail is
still relatively obscure, and isn't being targeted by a lot
of spammers yet.

-Carl

Carl Lumma wrote:

>(I speak
>from experience, having briefly worked for one of the largest
>spammers in the US -- a company called Jumpstart in San Francisco,
>which sent 40M messages every week, and apparently just went
>out of business.) Nevertheless, it's wise never to reply to
>a spammer.
>
AH HA!

--
* David Beardsley
* microtonal guitar
* http://biink.com/db

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, David Beardsley <db@b...> wrote:
> AH HA!

There you go again with the palindromes! A leopard can't change his
spots, or as we say: A Toyota's a Toyota.

Cheers,
Jon

Carl Lumma wrote:

>
>Most spam relies on the recipient clicking a link in it, not
>on a reply. Other spam is just to check for bounces -- they
>validate that your address is working. Most spammers have no
>way of recieving mail at the addresses they send from. (I speak
>from experience, having briefly worked for one of the largest
>spammers in the US -- a company called Jumpstart in San Francisco,
> >
but in order to sell the product thet have to pick up the messages from the potential buyeer

>which sent 40M messages every week, and apparently just went
>out of business.) Nevertheless, it's wise never to reply to
>a spammer.
> >

this is what had been said, but i think if everyone replied like a potential buyer, they would not be able to process the fakes from the customers they need to stay in bussiness

>The good news is, as David points out, statistical filters of
>just the right kind work extremely well -- so well you might
>get hundreds of spam messages a week and only have to worry about
>1 or 2 a month. Very few end-user products have the latest
>kind of filter, though. I dunno about Thunderbird... The open
>source CRM114 filter is one of the best (you have to be a unix
>geek to install it)...
>
>http://crm114.sourceforge.net/
>
>...but there is an easy-to-install version of it for Eudora...
>
>http://spamnix.com/
>
>...which I've been using with good results.
>
>The spam filtering in Gmail apears to be very good... much
>better than hotmail or Yahoo mail. Then again, Gmail is
>still relatively obscure, and isn't being targeted by a lot
>of spammers yet.
>
>-Carl
>
>
>
>
>
>Meta Tuning meta-info:
>
>To unsubscribe, send an email to:
>metatuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>Web page is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/metatuning/
>
>To post to the list, send to
>metatuning@yahoogroups.com
>
>You don't have to be a member to post.
>
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> >
>
>
> >

--
Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

if they had to respond t o100000 answers to their pitch, they would have to go through all of these just osee if anyone wanted to actually buy things

stephenszpak wrote:

>--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:
> >
> Wouldn't this encourage the spammers to increase their
> e-mails to you? S. Szpak
>
>
> >
>>It seems like if every person responded to every piece of spam >> >>
>those > >
>>recieving it would mnot be able to figure out which ones were real >>responses to what they wanted to sell.
>> Is there a reason this wouldn't work?
>>-- >>Kraig Grady
>>North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
>>The Wandering Medicine Show
>>KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles
>>
>> >>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Meta Tuning meta-info:
>
>To unsubscribe, send an email to:
>metatuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>Web page is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/metatuning/
>
>To post to the list, send to
>metatuning@yahoogroups.com
>
>You don't have to be a member to post.
>
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> >
>
>
> >

--
Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

> >Most spam relies on the recipient clicking a link in it, not
> >on a reply. Other spam is just to check for bounces -- they
> >validate that your address is working. Most spammers have no
> >way of recieving mail at the addresses they send from. (I speak
> >from experience, having briefly worked for one of the largest
> >spammers in the US -- a company called Jumpstart in San Francisco,
>
> but in order to sell the product thet have to pick up the messages
> from the potential buyeer

They get you to go to a web site.

> this is what had been said, but i think if everyone replied like a
> potential buyer, they would not be able to process the fakes from
> the customers they need to stay in bussiness

Like I said, most spammers do not even get incoming e-mail.

-Carl