Yes, I was being deliberately antagonistic. Sometimes I just can't resist
rattling the cage. Actually I did try spam a couple of times but found it
wasn't worth even the low apparent cost. I suspect a lot of spam is a result
of people just trying it out with no success, contrary to the
often-expressed theory that "it must be effective, or there wouldn't be so
much of it." It is a self-perpetuating illusion. The reason there is so much
of it is that it is so cheap. The root problem is that economics favor the
spammers. Unless that changes you can debate until you're blue in the face,
to no avail.
--Phil M.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Sheldon <
msheldon@desertraven.com>
To: <
plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2003 3:52 PM
Subject: RE: Spambot Trap
> >Well then, if you can't beat 'em, might as well join 'em.
> >>From now on I'll think of UCE as a potentially useful marketing tool.
> >I don't see anyone having a cow over postal junk mail.
> >--Phil M.
>
> ???
>
> Are you being deliberately antagonistic, or just naive?
>
> Noone's telling you not to do what you can to fight spam. I'm just
pointing
> out this particular tactic will not end spam. I've been active in fighting
> spam for long enough to know that there's no single *technical* solution
> that will completely stem the tide. Instead, it's a continuous defensive
> battle of reaction and damage control. For every tactic we use, the
spammers
> find a way around it. This is to be expected, and will continue for as
long
> as we have no *offensive* capability against the spammers. This doesn't
mean
> you shouldn't continue to fight, winning the battles is important. Just
> don't expect to win the war until such time as we can attack rather than
> defend.
>
>
> Michael J. Sheldon
> http://www.desertraven.com/
> Make a fast friend, adopt a greyhound!
>
>
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Michael Sheldon <msheldon@desertraven.com>
> >To: <plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
> >Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2003 10:56 AM
> >Subject: RE: Spambot Trap
> >
> >
> >> >If lots of webmasters did this, spambots might become so
> >inefficient that
> >> >spam would no longer be economically practical.
> >> >--Phil M.
> >>
> >> The spambots might become inefficient, but I doubt it would have a
> >> noticeable affect on spam at all. Very little of the spam I get is from
> >> addresses scraped off websites. The #1 is from addresses used for
domain
> >> registration. #2 is from an address used for newsgroup posting. #3 is
my
> >> regular personal account, which I've had for many years. That one got
> >> significantly worse after the latest viruses started spreading it
> >> willy-nilly. #4 are standard "role" accounts (webmaster@). Addresses
> >posted
> >> on my websites are well below any of these.
> >>
> >> Michael J. Sheldon
> >> http://www.desertraven.com/
> >> Make a fast friend, adopt a greyhound!
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------
> >> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
> >> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >>
> >>
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------
> >PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> >To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
> >http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
(text/plain)