Here is a thought. Since like 80% of the threads here are most clearly SPAM,
what if we did the reverse of SPAM flagging and preceded our subject lines by
something like [AISE]? Most spammers are hit-and-runners, so they won't get
the trick around it. Think of it as white flagging that helps separate ham
from spam.

Roy Schestowitz wrote:

> Here is a thought. Since like 80% of the threads here are most clearly SPAM,
> what if we did the reverse of SPAM flagging and preceded our subject lines by
> something like [AISE]?

Another possibility is to pay a subscription to a reliable news server that
offers spam filtering. I pay 10 euros per year to news.individual.net and most
of the groups I read are almost spam-free. This one has maybe one or two spams
per day that show up in my newsreader.

--
gbb

>> Here is a thought. Since like 80% of the threads here are most clearly
>> SPAM,
>> what if we did the reverse of SPAM flagging and preceded our subject
>> lines by
>> something like [AISE]?
>
> Another possibility is to pay a subscription to a reliable news server
> that
> offers spam filtering. I pay 10 euros per year to news.individual.net and
> most
> of the groups I read are almost spam-free. This one has maybe one or two
> spams
> per day that show up in my newsreader.

I like Roy's idea in principle, but I don't think it would work - for long -
for three reasons:

1. There'd be loads of double posts as idiots like me forgot to add the
'code'
2. While it would help with 'drive-by' spammers, it would actually help the
real scum - spammers within the community - who would use the 'code' as a
badge of legitimacy.

And most seriously:

3. It would be yet one more discouragement to new members who would feel
even more excluded.

GBB: is news.individual.net user friendly? is it a sensible layout?
10 Euros may be preferable to liberal use of the killfile!
--

Andrew
http://www.seo2seo.com/
http://www.sick-site-syndrome.com/
First things first - but not necessarily in that order.

The video that makes YouTube worthwhile:
Charlie The Unicorn - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5im0Ssyyus

"Andrew Heenan" <andrew3@heenan.net> wrote
> GBB: is news.individual.net user friendly? is it a sensible layout?
> 10 Euros may be preferable to liberal use of the killfile!

Wow!

This is the New Me, 10 Euros lighter - once I found I could do it via
Outlook Express (M$'s only good program!), there was no point hanging on.

I can't be doing with the web-based setups - too slow!
--

Andrew
http://www.seo2seo.com/
http://www.sick-site-syndrome.com/
First things first - but not necessarily in that order.

The video that makes YouTube worthwhile:
Charlie The Unicorn - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5im0Ssyyus

Andrew Heenan wrote:
> "Andrew Heenan" <andrew3@heenan.net> wrote
>> GBB: is news.individual.net user friendly? is it a sensible layout?
>> 10 Euros may be preferable to liberal use of the killfile!
>
> Wow!
>
> This is the New Me, 10 Euros lighter - once I found I could do it via
> Outlook Express (M$'s only good program!), there was no point hanging on.
>
> I can't be doing with the web-based setups - too slow!

Were you using a web based thing before then?

I have been using news.individual.net for nearly 3 years now and they
are well worth the money IMO - though from memory renewing was very
clunky last year.

> (M$'s only good program!)

It's not as good as Thunderbird!

Jez.

Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote:
>Here is a thought. Since like 80% of the threads here are most clearly SPAM,
>what if we did the reverse of SPAM flagging and preceded our subject lines by
>something like [AISE]? Most spammers are hit-and-runners, so they won't get
>the trick around it. Think of it as white flagging that helps separate ham
>from spam.

udp / filter / drop / score -9999

message-id: <containing> *googlegroups*
references: <containing> *googlegroups*


so easy, a caveman could do it.

spammer schreef:
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote:
>> Here is a thought. Since like 80% of the threads here are most clearly SPAM,
>> what if we did the reverse of SPAM flagging and preceded our subject lines by
>> something like [AISE]? Most spammers are hit-and-runners, so they won't get
>> the trick around it. Think of it as white flagging that helps separate ham
>>from spam.
>
> udp / filter / drop / score -9999
>
> message-id: <containing> *googlegroups*
> references: <containing> *googlegroups*
>
>
> so easy, a caveman could do it.

A caveman doesn't understand that there is more ...



--
Webdesign: http://vision2form.nl/webontwerp/
Korte handleiding zoekmachine optimalisatie / gevonden worden:
http://vision2form.nl/webontwerp/gevonden-worden.html
Lifestyle - wonen reizen en genieten : http://vision4living.com

Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote:

> Here is a thought. Since like 80% of the threads here are most clearly
> SPAM, what if we did the reverse of SPAM flagging and preceded our
> subject lines by something like [AISE]? Most spammers are
> hit-and-runners, so they won't get the trick around it. Think of it as
> white flagging that helps separate ham from spam.

Score everybody you like to read up. That way you can at least recognize
the regulars. I've kill filed all GG users, with one rule, and use another
rule to put the few GG users I like to read back. That, and by using the
(already recommended) individual I see very little spam.

--
John Bokma http://johnbokma.com/

"Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote in message
news:1373522.XzWFe5XtTp@schestowitz.com...
> Here is a thought. Since like 80% of the threads here are most clearly
> SPAM,
> what if we did the reverse of SPAM flagging and preceded our subject lines
> by
> something like [AISE]? Most spammers are hit-and-runners, so they won't
> get
> the trick around it. Think of it as white flagging that helps separate ham
> from spam.

Thing is Roy, you said it 80% are clearly spam so why mark it? It is already
easy for me to weed out the good stuff from the bad. I don't have any
problem not knowing.

I know this would be easy for you for the stats, but like I mentioned in the
other thread the stats in full really lets us see the real thing of how this
group is. Not doing anything and letting it go without trying to at least
start decent discussions will keep it so. People need to step up and start
really trying to do some good discussions about search engines and
marketing. Until then this group will continue to drop unless it gets
moderated and that won't work either.

Stacey

--
Jezsta Web Productions
SEO Tips - Website Design - Marketing
http://jezsta.com/

"Jezsta Web Productions" <use-our-email-form@jezsta.com> wrote:

> thing of how this group is. Not doing anything and letting it go
> without trying to at least start decent discussions will keep it so.

Spam doesn't go away if we suddenly all start to post on-topic and
informative posts. Spam goes away by reporting it. I've given up, more or
less on that. The plan for spam seems still to be to filter it out,
despite years and years of proof that filtering *does not work*

Anyway, most people here into SEO, if they had a long post on SEO, they
probably would put it on their site. I would (but damn, posting silly
posts on Usenet is so much less effort).

--
John Bokma http://johnbokma.com/