|« 11 April 2004 « - Back||Archives||Next - » 19 April 2004 »|
I don't pretend to understand all spam strategies, but I think these were tests to check if certain e-mail addresses would get through or bounce as invalid. Since I have a catchall box, none of them automatically bounce. So, now someone thinks there's a real person at the other end of 'bentley@...', 'clark@...', etc. etc. Joy. Maybe I should rethink the catchall and just accept mail to specific addresses.
I'm trying a switch to Apple's Mail client, which has a pretty good Bayesian spam filter (as well as many other nifty features - thread highlighting! Safari's HTML rendering!). So far it's working better for me than Eudora 6/free-with-ads; my only real complaint is its sluggishness when dealing with large mailboxes (and I'm on an 867MHz G4, OS X 10.3.3). I'll split my mail up differently and see how it goes. 4 comment(s)
Manually organizing your email is so 2003.
Catchall mailboxes were a fine idea when the email landscape was less hostile, but now they should be avoided. It's a luxury (allowing contacts to misspell your email address) that we can no longer afford.
Apple's spam filter was working very well until just recently. In the past few days more spam has been getting through. But, really, it's about 10 messages a day. It's catching about 50 a day or so, I guess these bursts happen occasionally, then it tapers off again.
I just read your October 30, 2001 entry about using ibuprofen plus caffeine to treat headache. Ever wonder why caffeine relieves headache?Add a comment...
Links, exploration and|
Photo by my wife
RSS Feed / Atom Feed
More Like This
Q Daily News
Laurel's TV Picks
Randall Bramblett: Thin Places
Doctors, Professors, Kings & Queens: The Big Ol' Box of New Orleans
Tears for Fears: Everybody Loves a Happy Ending
Ye olde Wishe Liste
|« 11 April 2004 « - Back||Next - » 19 April 2004 »|