On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 18:05:57 +0000, Chris Hogg wrote:

~On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 20:41:34 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:
~
~
~"Jane Ransom" wrote in message
...
~ In article , David david.simp
~ writes
~
~ But just about all the return addresses are false Jane,
~
~ So how do you account for the fact that we now receive no spam on that
~ mail box?
~
~You seem to be the only one for whom bouncing leads to reduced spam. I did
~not benefit from bouncing, and neither does any of my acquaintances.
~
~Franz
~
~I gave up bouncing a while ago. It didn't seem to reduce the spam and
~it just contributes to the junk flying around the internet.
~
~

Well after a few days of using Mailwasher I've finally got all my
friends and contacts programmed in. Now I've set up a spreadsheet in
which I shall record, over 2 weeks, the number of spams received,
number correctly identified, and number missed (ie true and false
positives). Ditto good mail. I am actively bouncing spam and
blacklisting the apparent senders.

If it's a resounding success, I shall consider letting it delete
automatically and buying the real version. We shall see!

Please await progress report in 2 weeks!


--
jane

Don't part with your illusions. When they are gone,
you may still exist but you have ceased to live.
Mark Twain

Please remove onmaps from replies, thanks!