Spam on the list [Was: Re: [R] Urgent ...]

[Martin Maechler]

>>>>> "PaCo" == Patrick Connolly <p.connolly at hortresearch.co.nz>
>>>>>     on Mon, 4 Nov 2002 17:19:12 +1300 writes:

    PaCo> On Mon, 04-Nov-2002 at 09:02AM +1300, Corrin Lakeland
    PaCo> wrote: |> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |> Hash:
    PaCo> SHA1 |> |> On Mon, 04 Nov 2002 03:58, Matej Cepl
    PaCo> wrote: |> |> > Can the list be set-up so that only
    PaCo> subscribed members of the |> > list can post?  |> |>
    PaCo> I'm sure it could, but I would like to note that this
    PaCo> causes a |> number of problems.  For example, the
    PaCo> address I post from is not |> the address I'm
    PaCo> subscribed from. You can get around this by |>
    PaCo> autowhitelisting and similar, but it is a hassle.  I'd
    PaCo> hazard a |> guess that installing spamassassin would
    PaCo> probably cause fewer |> problems.

    PaCo> I, for one, am not impressed with spamassassin's
    PaCo> algorithm for detecting spam.  It would have given the
    PaCo> message I'm responding to points because it has a line
    PaCo> all in capitals (the first one I've quoted).  Another
    PaCo> one I've had experience with took exception to the
    PaCo> fact that my Steven Wright quote contained the words
    PaCo> "world`s largest".

    PaCo> Trying to make an algorithm that detects spam is kind
    PaCo> of like trying to travel at the speed of light.  As
    PaCo> soon as a system is set up, the spammers modify their
    PaCo> tactics to "comply".  So it's never ending.

    PaCo> The eye is a better judge of spam than a computer
    PaCo> algorithm.  I never read the spam in question because
    PaCo> I automatically deleted it since I noticed it had the
    PaCo> word 'urgent' in its subject.  Yes, it's annoying --
    PaCo> particularly if you have to pay to download your mail,
    PaCo> but I really don't think a filter is doable.

    PaCo> Of course, if someone doesn't mind trawling through
    PaCo> the rejects thrown out by a filter and checks that
    PaCo> they really are spam, it would be greatly appreciated
    PaCo> by the rest of the list provided it can be done
    PaCo> without holding up genuine posts for long periods.
    PaCo> Not a particularly pleasant job -- kind of like who
    PaCo> empties the compost bucket in your household.

Well, as Peter Dalgaard has said already,
you have **no idea** how many spam messages you would be getting
through R-help if I hadn't installed heavy filtering a long time
ago!!
And yes, it's me who has to manually wade through many (not all
anymore) rejects and decide if they are really spam, and then
manually approve (forward to R-help) the several ones per week
that were wrongly caught.

The whole spam / filtering business is the reason, we haven't
been accepting binary attachments or (most) heavy HTMLified
messages, on the mailing lists.
Please also have a look at the "General Instructions" section of
  http://www.R-project.org/mail.html

Note that we have been experimenting with procmail and
spamassassin here, and I will probably start using them for the
mailing lists too.  Longer term, this might allow me to move all
the majordomo lists to mailman.

Regards,
your R - mailing list maintainer,
Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch>	http://stat.ethz.ch/~maechler/
Seminar fuer Statistik, ETH-Zentrum  LEO C16	Leonhardstr. 27
ETH (Federal Inst. Technology)	8092 Zurich	SWITZERLAND
phone: x-41-1-632-3408		fax: ...-1228			<><
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._