Kill the SPAMs!

Richard H. Miller rick at crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu
Sat Sep 20 14:02:38 EST 1997


Richard H. Miller (rick at crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu) wrote:
: taguebw at REMOVEwfu.edu wrote:

: : In article <5vlk2l$i6f$1 at oravannahka.Helsinki.FI>, Dag Stenberg
: : <stenberg at cc.helsinki.fi> wrote:

: : > Seeing that some days the complete content of bionet.general consists of
: : > spam, whereas other newsgroups I frequent all have less than 50% spam
: : > content, it came to me: does the word "general" attract especially many
: : > spammers? What would be better: change of name or moderated group?
: : > 
: : > Dag STenberg

: : This may be true: there are a number of city specific ng's that use
: : "general"; i.e., the baltimore newgroup is ba.general. The name may be
: : part of the problem with spam in this group.

: The name probably is but the location (early in the alphabit is more). I
: also wonder if any of the spam killers are scanning bionet for spam. Someone
: might drop a line (with one of the spams) to new.admin.net-abuse.usenet and
: suggest that the spam killers include this hierarchy in their activities.
: They currently do handle most of the local hierarchies


And as I follow up my own posting; another reason (and more likely) is that
the gateway address for bionet.general is in many of the harvested address
lists. (If you actually read some of the spam, you soon realize that most of
the spam is actually unsolicited commercial email (or UCE) which was sent
to the email address and posted to the newsgroup. ) Maybe it might not be
a bad idea to kill off the current address and change it to something else




More information about the Bioforum mailing list