A proper address, please
Paul Blair
Paul
DiMa
If you are referring to me, I never asked for a private email - I am quite
happy to have replies to the newsgroup.
Thank you once again for sending the instructions.
--
Di
I'm creative! You can't expect me to be neat too.
Vic Australia
To reply please remove # in email address.
"Paul Blair" <pbl...@pcug.org.au> wrote in message
news:12567171...@chilli.pcug.org.au...
peter
> Hi Paul,
> If you are referring to me, I never asked for a private email - I am quite
> happy to have replies to the newsgroup.
Yes, it is usual practice to reply to the group, that way everyone gets to
share and learn from the communication.
And, it is common on usenet to mungle your email address, to prevent getting
on spam lists. Usually, it is mungled in such a way that a human can easily
decode it.
HTH
Peter
Mick
No one of us has the authority or even right to dictate to another how
they choose to handle their security.
MickG
--
------------
< I'm Karmic >
------------
\
\
___
{~._.~}
( Y )
()~*~()
(_)-(_)
Tim Powys-Lybbe
> peter wrote:
> > DiMa wrote:
> > > Hi Paul, If you are referring to me, I never asked for a private
> > > email - I am quite happy to have replies to the newsgroup.
> >
> > Yes, it is usual practice to reply to the group, that way everyone
> > gets to share and learn from the communication.
> >
> > And, it is common on usenet to mungle your email address, to prevent
> > getting on spam lists. Usually, it is mungled in such a way that a
> > human can easily decode it.
> >
> > HTH
> >
> > Peter
> >
> Common maybe but not required because newsnet is unmoderated.
>
> No one of us has the authority or even right to dictate to another how
> they choose to handle their security.
Agreed, no-one can dictate. But as you can see below and in my headers,
I don't bother with any security. I get one or so spam a day and my ISP
has received and blocked a further 109 in the last three weeks. So my
preference for everyone is that we are up-front about who we are.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe t...@powys.org
for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/
Paul Blair
I sent Di some material that, on advice, should not be posted in common.
My choice. I advised the group that I had responded.
As for munging - it is the easiest thing on earth to strip 99% of munged
addresses to the real thing. The spammers of the world have had plenty
of practice at that!
Paul
Percival P. Cassidy
>>>> Hi Paul, If you are referring to me, I never asked for a private
>>>> email - I am quite happy to have replies to the newsgroup.
>>> Yes, it is usual practice to reply to the group, that way everyone
>>> gets to share and learn from the communication.
>>>
>>> And, it is common on usenet to mungle your email address, to prevent
>>> getting on spam lists. Usually, it is mungled in such a way that a
>>> human can easily decode it.
>> Common maybe but not required because newsnet is unmoderated.
>>
>> No one of us has the authority or even right to dictate to another how
>> they choose to handle their security.
> Agreed, no-one can dictate. But as you can see below and in my headers,
> I don't bother with any security. I get one or so spam a day and my ISP
> has received and blocked a further 109 in the last three weeks. So my
> preference for everyone is that we are up-front about who we are.
Do you check whether the messages your ISP classes as spam and jeeps you
from seeing rally are spam? Can you check? Or do you simply have to
trust your ISP?
I have accounts through two ISPs, and both of them at various times have
"bounced" back to Yahoo! yahoogroups messages that the ISP has classed
as spam -- and then yahoogroups quits sending messages. Sometimes it
takes me a day or two to realize that it's a while since I received any
yahoogroups messages to a particular one of my addresses, and then I
have to go and convince yahoogroups that that email address still exists.
And all of this despite choosing the option to have the ISPs NOT block
spam. I have a "smart" mail/newsreader that learns what *I* class as
spam, and I want my ISPs to keep their grubby hands off messages
addressed to me.
Perce
Tim Powys-Lybbe
> Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:
>
<snip for non-relevant to this message, for brevity>
>
> > Agreed, no-one can dictate. But as you can see below and in my
> > headers, I don't bother with any security. I get one or so spam a
> > day and my ISP has received and blocked a further 109 in the last
> > three weeks. So my preference for everyone is that we are up-front
> > about who we are.
>
> Do you check whether the messages your ISP classes as spam and jeeps
> you from seeing rally are spam? Can you check? Or do you simply have
> to trust your ISP?
I do check and for the very few that they have wrongly rejected, I have
put the people on their white list
There were no errors on the last check, for instance.
> I have accounts through two ISPs, and both of them at various times
> have "bounced" back to Yahoo! yahoogroups messages that the ISP has
> classed as spam -- and then yahoogroups quits sending messages.
> Sometimes it takes me a day or two to realize that it's a while since
> I received any yahoogroups messages to a particular one of my
> addresses, and then I have to go and convince yahoogroups that that
> email address still exists.
>
> And all of this despite choosing the option to have the ISPs NOT block
> spam. I have a "smart" mail/newsreader that learns what *I* class as
> spam, and I want my ISPs to keep their grubby hands off messages
> addressed to me.
I am delighted with the high performance of my ISP's spam detection and
that I have none of the rubbish traffic going down my telephone wires.
YMMV.
singhals
> DiMa wrote:
>
>>Hi Paul,
>>If you are referring to me, I never asked for a private email - I am quite
>>happy to have replies to the newsgroup.
>
>
> Yes, it is usual practice to reply to the group, that way everyone gets to
> share and learn from the communication.
>
That was back in the day, when groups were classes in
progress, not look-up providers.
If I have the document needed, I need a good e-mail addy to
send it to -- particularly as the groups here were set up to
prevent my filling your mailbox with images you don't want
(which would, I imagine, include the birth, marriage, and
death certificates of people not-related to you). And I
rarely can muster the time or patience to do the dance -- X
posts a query, I post "I've got a that, let me have your
real e-dress"; X posts back, "can you put it on-line so I
can just pick it up?" "Not easily." X then admits "I really
don't like sharing my e-mail address." I can now go create
a new subdirectory on one of my sites JUST for X's
convenience, or I can end the exchange, allowing X his total
privacy to find the document himself.
Whereas if X had simply given a real addy in the first
place, he'd have had the document(s) in a few hours.
> And, it is common on usenet to mungle your email address, to prevent getting
> on spam lists. Usually, it is mungled in such a way that a human can easily
> decode it.
And how, exactly, would you or I know whether myspi.com IS
myspi.com not .net and not mysip.??? or myisp.??? And is it
.co.uk or just .co ? Is .com.in a REAL addy? MUCH easier
when everything was .mil or .edu but once more hoi polloi
got into it and mucked things up nicely.
Then there are the determined who transliterate an English
letter into the Greek letter that "looks like" it and then
back into the English letter that corresponds to the name of
the Greek look-alike. There's a Dutch company whose USA
street name goes here as commentary.
Cheryl