I just want to give a little positive feedback. I thought that's what theseJack Toff said:You are a newsgroup spammer.
David H. Lipman said:If someone asked about it, yes. That's ok.
No one did, and as an unsolicited post that's a type of spam. In fact
many spam posts masquerade as someone who purports to have just found a
product and says its good and suggests it.
If this was a spam or email related news group, then your post would have
some legitimacy as being on Topic. As a WinXP news group, no.
See - you learned something.
Jeff said:I'm gonna do a little good advertising. I'm impressed with the way cloudmark
pro handles spam. So far it has detected all spam and sent it to quarantine.
Very few false positives. It does a good job.
Is it okay to have positive comments in this newsgroup?
VanguardLH said:You won't like my comments because they're negative.
Cloudmark is a community voting scheme. Users vote by submitting
examples once they receive the spam. Notice I say that they RECEIVE the
spam to then report it (to vote it as spam). That means you have boobs
voting on e-mails that don't qualify as spam but merely as unwanted
e-mails. It also means those who poll their e-mails regularly and at
short intervals WILL see the spam because there hasn't been enough
voting on that message yet.
If you are the first few hundred or couple thousand to receive the spam,
it won't be in their database. The first victims still see the spam.
The first victims report the spam to save the hash code for it in the
server database. Then later potential victims get the advantage of
using that voting to not see that same spam (except those users still do
see the spam when checking the spam folder for false positives). I
rarely got new spam that had sufficient voting so that it marked as spam
for me. Instead I'd see the new spam (not yet flagged as such), vote on
it, and someone else didn't have to see the spam. I got to work for
free to help someone else not see the spam and Cloudmark got the credit.
You need to connect to their database to check the hash code for a
reported spam to compare against the hash for your new e-mails. That
means problems with offline spam checking. You have to do the spam
check right after your e-mail session with the server but BEFORE you
disconnect from the Internet.
"Few false positives". That's still too many. You configure spam
filtering to generate no false positives (good e-mails flagged as spam)
and few negatives (spam that didn't get flagged as spam). Otherwise,
there's no point in using such a system. Why? Because you still have
to go monitor the spam folder looking for false positives. Having to
review the spam that you receive negates the purpose of filtering it
out. If you're reviewing the spam, you're seeing the spam, so you
wasted time to segregate it. Maybe you don't care about losing a few
good e-mails that were wrongly flagged as spam. That is not a tolerable
business model.
By the way, Cloudmark started as SpamNet. That started out as free for
personal use. What they did was use volunteers to test their setup,
load test it, and build their database to flesh out their entire system.
Then when it was deemed ready for commercial use, they yanked it away
from their volunteers. It was no longer free. They didn't offer a
discount to their volunteers that had helped them test and modify their
system. They just ripped it away and told current users how much it
would cost if they wanted to continue using it. Since it already had
the deficiencies noted above, I wasn't going to waste my time with it.
Note the topic of this newsgroup. It discusses Windows XP, not spam
itself or spam-related programs. For anti-spam discussions, go post in
those newsgroups, like alt.spam. "Advertising", as you stated, is
spamming, especially since your post is off-topic to this newsgroup.
VanguardLH said:You won't like my comments because they're negative.
Cloudmark is a community voting scheme. Users vote by submitting
examples once they receive the spam. Notice I say that they RECEIVE the
spam to then report it (to vote it as spam). That means you have boobs
voting on e-mails that don't qualify as spam but merely as unwanted
e-mails. It also means those who poll their e-mails regularly and at
short intervals WILL see the spam because there hasn't been enough
voting on that message yet.
If you are the first few hundred or couple thousand to receive the spam,
it won't be in their database. The first victims still see the spam.
The first victims report the spam to save the hash code for it in the
server database. Then later potential victims get the advantage of
using that voting to not see that same spam (except those users still do
see the spam when checking the spam folder for false positives). I
rarely got new spam that had sufficient voting so that it marked as spam
for me. Instead I'd see the new spam (not yet flagged as such), vote on
it, and someone else didn't have to see the spam. I got to work for
free to help someone else not see the spam and Cloudmark got the credit.
You need to connect to their database to check the hash code for a
reported spam to compare against the hash for your new e-mails. That
means problems with offline spam checking. You have to do the spam
check right after your e-mail session with the server but BEFORE you
disconnect from the Internet.
"Few false positives". That's still too many. You configure spam
filtering to generate no false positives (good e-mails flagged as spam)
and few negatives (spam that didn't get flagged as spam). Otherwise,
there's no point in using such a system. Why? Because you still have
to go monitor the spam folder looking for false positives. Having to
review the spam that you receive negates the purpose of filtering it
out. If you're reviewing the spam, you're seeing the spam, so you
wasted time to segregate it. Maybe you don't care about losing a few
good e-mails that were wrongly flagged as spam. That is not a tolerable
business model.
By the way, Cloudmark started as SpamNet. That started out as free for
personal use. What they did was use volunteers to test their setup,
load test it, and build their database to flesh out their entire system.
Then when it was deemed ready for commercial use, they yanked it away
from their volunteers. It was no longer free. They didn't offer a
discount to their volunteers that had helped them test and modify their
system. They just ripped it away and told current users how much it
would cost if they wanted to continue using it. Since it already had
the deficiencies noted above, I wasn't going to waste my time with it.
Note the topic of this newsgroup. It discusses Windows XP, not spam
itself or spam-related programs. For anti-spam discussions, go post in
those newsgroups, like alt.spam. "Advertising", as you stated, is
spamming, especially since your post is off-topic to this newsgroup.
Thats ok. I got chewed out here once for typing "test"Jeff said:The reason I thought that maybe this pertained to WindowsXP is because I've
got Cloudmark (which works good for me) working with Outlook Express on a
Windows XP machine.
I didn't really understand what it meant to be a "newsgroup spammer". So I
did learn something!!!
Paul said:Thats ok. I got chewed out here once for typing "test"
in the header.
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.