Re: My Credit rateing does TOO matter

[Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>]

Guys -- vague hints as to the contents of the mail really don't help.  

It's spam -- we're all getting thousands of spams a day, most of us (ok, I
for one at least) seem to be finding those going into the spam bins
without our help, and I'd say it's unlikely that many of us (ok, me
again ;) are going to go rooting through the trash there looking for
something that seems to match what you're hinting at.

Why not just post a spample, or a link to one?

--j.

Joe Zitnik writes:
> >>> On 12/1/2006 at 5:22 AM, John Andersen <js...@pen.homeip.net> wrote:
> On Friday 01 December 2006 00:29, Loren Wilton wrote:
> >  guess you're just lucky.  I just went through the last month's spam
> and I
> > can't find anything with a subject about credit ratings.  
> 
> Oh, no, I didn't mean to suggest it was in the subject.  
> 
> Its usually some random subject.  Then a paragraph starting with "your
> credit 
> rating doesn't matter to us" with the usual misspellings, etc, followed
> by 
> (usually) a geocities link and some random text at the end.
> 
> -- 
> _____________________________________
> John Andersen
> 
> 
> I was wondering the same thing.  Even given the random text, I would
> think between the default rules, and the fact that I've dumped a bunch
> in to bayes, that the spammy content would be enough to nail them for
> sure.  I'm still seeing a significant number skate by.

Re: My Credit rateing does TOO matter

[Nigel Frankcom <ni...@blue-canoe.net>]

On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 09:15:35 -0500, "Joe Zitnik" <JZ...@hfcc.net>
wrote:

>
>>>> On 12/1/2006 at 7:01 AM, Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org> wrote:
>
>> Guys -- vague hints as to the contents of the mail really don't help.
> 
>> 
>> It's spam -- we're all getting thousands of spams a day, most of us
>(ok, I
>> for one at least) seem to be finding those going into the spam bins
>> without our help, and I'd say it's unlikely that many of us (ok, me
>> again ;) are going to go rooting through the trash there looking for
>> something that seems to match what you're hinting at.
>> 
>> Why not just post a spample, or a link to one?
>> 
>> --j.
>> 
>> Joe Zitnik writes:
>>> >>> On 12/1/2006 at 5:22 AM, John Andersen <js...@pen.homeip.net>
>wrote:
>>> On Friday 01 December 2006 00:29, Loren Wilton wrote:
>>> >  guess you're just lucky.  I just went through the last month's
>spam
>>> and I
>>> > can't find anything with a subject about credit ratings.  
>>> 
>>> Oh, no, I didn't mean to suggest it was in the subject.  
>>> 
>>> Its usually some random subject.  Then a paragraph starting with
>"your
>>> credit 
>>> rating doesn't matter to us" with the usual misspellings, etc,
>followed
>>> by 
>>> (usually) a geocities link and some random text at the end.
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> _____________________________________
>>> John Andersen
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I was wondering the same thing.  Even given the random text, I
>would
>>> think between the default rules, and the fact that I've dumped a
>bunch
>>> in to bayes, that the spammy content would be enough to nail them
>for
>>> sure.  I'm still seeing a significant number skate by.
>
>
>It wasn't really a vague hint, or rather, if you're receiving them, you
>know exactly the spam he's talking about.  I wasn't asking for a
>solution, I was just commenting on the fact that, like John, I was
>surprised these spams would make it through.  At least that's why I
>didn't post the contents or a link to the contents.

I'm glad you didn't or I'd have missed the thread. I have a content
filter running for those. I got sick and tired of checking hundreds
daily during my fp checks. Now I just root them at the MTA.

Prior to that SA was catching them though. Perhaps you are missing a
key rule or update?

Nigel

Re: My Credit rateing does TOO matter

[Joe Zitnik <JZ...@hfcc.net>]

>>> On 12/1/2006 at 7:01 AM, Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org> wrote:

> Guys -- vague hints as to the contents of the mail really don't help.
 
> 
> It's spam -- we're all getting thousands of spams a day, most of us
(ok, I
> for one at least) seem to be finding those going into the spam bins
> without our help, and I'd say it's unlikely that many of us (ok, me
> again ;) are going to go rooting through the trash there looking for
> something that seems to match what you're hinting at.
> 
> Why not just post a spample, or a link to one?
> 
> --j.
> 
> Joe Zitnik writes:
>> >>> On 12/1/2006 at 5:22 AM, John Andersen <js...@pen.homeip.net>
wrote:
>> On Friday 01 December 2006 00:29, Loren Wilton wrote:
>> >  guess you're just lucky.  I just went through the last month's
spam
>> and I
>> > can't find anything with a subject about credit ratings.  
>> 
>> Oh, no, I didn't mean to suggest it was in the subject.  
>> 
>> Its usually some random subject.  Then a paragraph starting with
"your
>> credit 
>> rating doesn't matter to us" with the usual misspellings, etc,
followed
>> by 
>> (usually) a geocities link and some random text at the end.
>> 
>> -- 
>> _____________________________________
>> John Andersen
>> 
>> 
>> I was wondering the same thing.  Even given the random text, I
would
>> think between the default rules, and the fact that I've dumped a
bunch
>> in to bayes, that the spammy content would be enough to nail them
for
>> sure.  I'm still seeing a significant number skate by.


It wasn't really a vague hint, or rather, if you're receiving them, you
know exactly the spam he's talking about.  I wasn't asking for a
solution, I was just commenting on the fact that, like John, I was
surprised these spams would make it through.  At least that's why I
didn't post the contents or a link to the contents.