rubbish posting

That is no longer a problem for AOL users:-

"Important Notice: AOL Newsgroup Service

From early 2005, AOL members will no longer be able to use the Newsgroup service through AOL. You will however be able to access Usenet newsgroups via Internet Explorer, or Google at

For AOL alternatives, go to AOL Keyword: Community.

We are sorry for any inconvenience. "

(I bet they are)

kim

"mutley"

Same here except I use an ISP that filters mail. On a bad day I'll get three or four spam mail. In some 15 years or so, I've only ever had three e-mail addresses, the last two of which have been with the same ISP for at least 10 years.

-- Cheers Roger T.

Home of the Great Eastern Railway

I've got a pay news account with Clara and I'm showing 69000 groups :-) including at least 1000 in the domain alt.flame (ie it's full of s**te)

As for news readers Agent

is certainly the best that I've used and you're MUCH more immune from from the kind of nasties that OE likes to run.

In message , Joe Ellis writes

That few? Demon carries 43178.

In message , kim writes

Isn't that one of the three biggest lies on earth, along with "Your cheque is in the post" and ....

On 25/01/2005 17:08, John Sullivan wrote,

That few? PlusNet carries 61922

a small part of the story. What about documents that have the address in, some not ebven held by you etc.

sufice it to say, it is not an option for me.

I believe there are under 30,000 "legit" groups on usenet. Many groups are empty or contain only spam and virus postings, while others are duplicated, improperly created and/or contain spelling errors, e.g. "bainaries". Some NSPs filter out such groups; ones that boast 60,000,

80,000 or "every group that exists" are not necessarily better.

Keeping an OE address book is a good way to get trojans.

My ISP mail server is very good at filtering spam; the few that do get through are addressed to a secondary address that I have on a website. I haven't used my real address on usenet for years. Problem is, it sometimes blocks messages from whole ISPs that are considered spam sources - e.g. Tiscali. I don't get notified, but the e-mail is bounced back to the sender. My wife and I also maintain Yahoo! addresses to get around such problems. The Yahoo! accounts don't get any spam unless they're publicly advertised on usenet or www.

Because I usually read usenet text groups on a text-only server, I don't see any spam posts that have a binary attachment.

"One size fits all"

(kim)

Don't forget "We value your custom" and "I know what I'm doing"

snipped-for-privacy@privacy.net is also a valid, and popular, spoof email address, the owner of the privacy.net domain has given permission for people to use it as a posting address if they wish.

and... "In order to bring you an improved service, we are closing our local office" [Lloyds, Post Office, Housing Association]

(kim)

In message , kim writes

That's the fourth biggest lie on earth.

In message , Rich Mackin writes

The problem with this one is that so many people use it, if someone has killfiled a troll who was using this address, then you also end up in their killfile as well.

The thing is, I thought the bulk of Spam-mail is generated by 'trawl robots' rather than human beings who actually read through the address lists!

My Thanks to you, and all other responders, for the information supplied.

David

[JT said the following]

email

Yes, and it doesn't take much of a computer program to sniff and remove spam blockers like you use(ed)

Just to add to what John said, snipped-for-privacy@invalid.invalid is the advised way of using the invalid domain as a spam block.

Also, it's _spam_ not Spam, the latter is something you might wish to eat made out of prim cuts of chopped pork and ham !

I wish spam was Spam - then at least it would be good for something!

My spell-checker is to blame... keeps insisting on capitalising the word spam!

Many thanks, I'll give it a try.

David.