Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
Gail Futoran wrote:
"Gill Passman" wrote in message ... Agreed....it also means that a poster needs to use a valid email address....I guess if they make a contraversial post with a fake address then the post would just remain removed - and so it should be. Damn. I hadn't thought about that one. However,... I use an invalid email address to post. It's obvious to any individual what they need to do to send me email, but is that something we ought to be asking moderators to do? I don't know the answer. I do know that if I can't use a munged (I think that's the term) email addy when posting online to minimize spam in my inbox, then I'm going to have to rethink posting online, and I'd rather not do that. Not a problem, I think. If every email has to be valid (if they want moderated posts returned) the software should be able to mung the email addresses. -- derek |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
Derek Broughton wrote:
Not a problem, I think. If every email has to be valid (if they want moderated posts returned) the software should be able to mung the email addresses. I hadn't thought of that - email addies munged by the moderation software sounds a good idea....I wonder how far this could be taken - would it, for example, be possible for only the robo-moderation software to know the "real addresses" of posters - so if a post is returned it automatically unmungs the address without a human being ever having to know the true address? Just throwing out ideas here - don't even know if any software is out there capable of doing this. Some people have a more protective stance on their email addresses than others - and this in itself might put them off a moderated group...or would the moderators feel that if they are trusted enough to moderate the group they should be trusted to have all the "real" email addresses of posters? Or would the munging be so obvious that everyone could work out the address anyway? Or does any of this matter to the average poster? All food for thought.... Gill |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
For some reason or other I fail to grasp what is so darn hard about using a valid email account like yahoo or hotmail. It would suffice for the purpose at hand and it is indeed a valid email......I do not think anyone is asking to make anyone give up their ISP's givenemail addy, as that is kiind of strong actins especiallyin a forum where emails can be harvested. Odds are there is no bots thats gonna un-mung an email, but there are jerks that have nothng better to do than un-mung a simple mung job, if given a reason. On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 13:21:12 +0000, Gill Passman wrote: Derek Broughton wrote: Not a problem, I think. If every email has to be valid (if they want moderated posts returned) the software should be able to mung the email addresses. I hadn't thought of that - email addies munged by the moderation software sounds a good idea....I wonder how far this could be taken - would it, for example, be possible for only the robo-moderation software to know the "real addresses" of posters - so if a post is returned it automatically unmungs the address without a human being ever having to know the true address? Just throwing out ideas here - don't even know if any software is out there capable of doing this. Some people have a more protective stance on their email addresses than others - and this in itself might put them off a moderated group...or would the moderators feel that if they are trusted enough to moderate the group they should be trusted to have all the "real" email addresses of posters? Or would the munging be so obvious that everyone could work out the address anyway? Or does any of this matter to the average poster? All food for thought.... Gill ------- I forgot more about ponds and koi than I'll ever know! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
Gill Passman wrote:
Derek Broughton wrote: Not a problem, I think. If every email has to be valid (if they want moderated posts returned) the software should be able to mung the email addresses. I hadn't thought of that - email addies munged by the moderation software sounds a good idea....I wonder how far this could be taken - would it, for example, be possible for only the robo-moderation software to know the "real addresses" of posters - so if a post is returned it automatically unmungs the address without a human being ever having to know the true address? Not sure about that. Just throwing out ideas here - don't even know if any software is out there capable of doing this. Some people have a more protective stance on their email addresses than others - and this in itself might put them off a moderated group...or would the moderators feel that if they are trusted enough to moderate the group they should be trusted to have all the "real" email addresses of posters? Or would the munging be so obvious that everyone could work out the address anyway? Or does any of this matter to the average poster? It might not matter to the average poster but it will matter to _some_ posters, and it _should_ matter to the moderators. It occurs to me that privacy laws in many places actually require us to say exactly how we will use (and protect - or not: in some places it's ok not to protect personal information but the suppliers of that information need to know that is what happens) these addresses. -- derek |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
It only matters to folks with something to hide. All folks weather they fuss, fued, dissagree and fight ar enot as mean and vindictive as CArol and her supporters are, so a real email addy means nothing. I have only gotten unsolicted emails from one of CArols supporters on a routine basis but as to emails from others it jjst did not happen. And don;'t say my email awas munged as it certainly had been printe douyt in Black and While by carol and her suporters enough of times for anyone that wanted to respond could have. It just did not happen, only from vindictive slimey supporters that had no more morals than Carol did. Now a lot of y umay have seen lots of munged and forged headers portraying me and osme others, but most if not all were in deed good fogeries by carol and her band of supporters. On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 13:19:48 -0400, Derek Broughton wrote: Gill Passman wrote: Derek Broughton wrote: Not a problem, I think. If every email has to be valid (if they want moderated posts returned) the software should be able to mung the email addresses. I hadn't thought of that - email addies munged by the moderation software sounds a good idea....I wonder how far this could be taken - would it, for example, be possible for only the robo-moderation software to know the "real addresses" of posters - so if a post is returned it automatically unmungs the address without a human being ever having to know the true address? Not sure about that. Just throwing out ideas here - don't even know if any software is out there capable of doing this. Some people have a more protective stance on their email addresses than others - and this in itself might put them off a moderated group...or would the moderators feel that if they are trusted enough to moderate the group they should be trusted to have all the "real" email addresses of posters? Or would the munging be so obvious that everyone could work out the address anyway? Or does any of this matter to the average poster? It might not matter to the average poster but it will matter to _some_ posters, and it _should_ matter to the moderators. It occurs to me that privacy laws in many places actually require us to say exactly how we will use (and protect - or not: in some places it's ok not to protect personal information but the suppliers of that information need to know that is what happens) these addresses. ------- I forgot more about ponds and koi than I'll ever know! |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
Gill Passman wrote:
Derek Broughton wrote: Not a problem, I think. If every email has to be valid (if they want moderated posts returned) the software should be able to mung the email addresses. I hadn't thought of that - email addies munged by the moderation software sounds a good idea....I wonder how far this could be taken - would it, for example, be possible for only the robo-moderation software to know the "real addresses" of posters - so if a post is returned it automatically unmungs the address without a human being ever having to know the true address? I would consider munging the email address a form of editing and am, therefore, personally opposed to the idea,subject to persuasion. My 2¢ -- Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their families! Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! ! ~Semper Fi~ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
wrote in message ... I would consider munging the email address a form of editing and am, therefore, personally opposed to the idea,subject to persuasion. My 2¢ =========================== Your mind will change rapidly if a few trolls used it to impersonate you on groups you don't even know exist - plus use them everywhere so you're picked up by every addy-combing bot out there. You suddenly find your inbox is maxed out with spam, threats, barely coherent obscene messages and such trash. ;-) I had to change mine twice, so now I keep it private. -- ZB.... Frugal ponding since 1995. rec.ponder since late 1996. My Pond & Aquarium Pages: http://tinyurl.com/9do58 ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({* -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
Zëbulon wrote:
wrote in message I would consider munging the email address a form of editing and am, therefore, personally opposed to the idea,subject to persuasion. My 2¢ =========================== Your mind will change rapidly if a few trolls used it to impersonate you on groups you don't even know exist - plus use them everywhere so you're picked up by every addy-combing bot out there. You suddenly find your inbox is maxed out with spam, threats, barely coherent obscene messages and such trash. ;-) I had to change mine twice, so now I keep it private. Well, you chose to bring yourself to my doorstep with this reply. I'm not as paranoid as you. I've had the same e-mail addy since I first went online, I don't know how many years ago. I'm on some pretty rough NGs, including moderated ones that won't accept my munged e-mail addy (q.v.). I've gotten my share of the types of junk you describe. My SPAM filter gets most of it, I add others to my Junk folder for filtering as needed. We each make our own bed and have to lie in it. Like Karma! BTW I have enjoyed many of your on-topic posts and look forward to more in r.p.m. -- Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their families! Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! ! ~Semper Fi~ |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
wrote in message ... Zëbulon wrote: wrote in message I would consider munging the email address a form of editing and am, therefore, personally opposed to the idea,subject to persuasion. My 2¢ =========================== Your mind will change rapidly if a few trolls used it to impersonate you on groups you don't even know exist - plus use them everywhere so you're picked up by every addy-combing bot out there. You suddenly find your inbox is maxed out with spam, threats, barely coherent obscene messages and such trash. ;-) I had to change mine twice, so now I keep it private. ======================== Well, you chose to bring yourself to my doorstep with this reply. I'm not as paranoid as you. One becomes a bit paranoid when constantly harassed by trolls who use their e-mail address to harass them further. Why give them access to it at all since it's not necessary? I've had the same e-mail addy since I first went online, I don't know how many years ago. Yes, I had the same one for 8 years until the trolls used it to impersonate me and the spam became more than I wanted to delete several times a day. Now I get no threats, no one is impersonating me using my e-mail address and spam is minimal. I'm on some pretty rough NGs, including moderated ones that won't accept my munged e-mail addy (q.v.). I've gotten my share of the types of junk you describe. My SPAM filter gets most of it, OE has a lousy spam-filter as I'm sure you know. Also, the spammers change their addresses and other info daily so that was useless. I add others to my Junk folder for filtering as needed. We each make our own bed and have to lie in it. Like Karma! BTW I have enjoyed many of your on-topic posts and look forward to more in r.p.m. Thank you! I really look forward to posting and reading about ponds and fish in peace again. -- ZB.... Frugal ponding since 1995. rec.ponder since late 1996. My Pond & Aquarium Pages: http://tinyurl.com/9do58 ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({* -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
Sheeeeeeeesh Carol spare all of us that know yu so well all the crap
your trying to peddle. Your the reason folks need to munge emails. On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 22:20:21 -0600, Zëbulon wrote: wrote in message ... Zëbulon wrote: wrote in message I would consider munging the email address a form of editing and am, therefore, personally opposed to the idea,subject to persuasion. My 2¢ =========================== Your mind will change rapidly if a few trolls used it to impersonate you on groups you don't even know exist - plus use them everywhere so you're picked up by every addy-combing bot out there. You suddenly find your inbox is maxed out with spam, threats, barely coherent obscene messages and such trash. ;-) I had to change mine twice, so now I keep it private. ======================== Well, you chose to bring yourself to my doorstep with this reply. I'm not as paranoid as you. One becomes a bit paranoid when constantly harassed by trolls who use their e-mail address to harass them further. Why give them access to it at all since it's not necessary? I've had the same e-mail addy since I first went online, I don't know how many years ago. Yes, I had the same one for 8 years until the trolls used it to impersonate me and the spam became more than I wanted to delete several times a day. Now I get no threats, no one is impersonating me using my e-mail address and spam is minimal. I'm on some pretty rough NGs, including moderated ones that won't accept my munged e-mail addy (q.v.). I've gotten my share of the types of junk you describe. My SPAM filter gets most of it, OE has a lousy spam-filter as I'm sure you know. Also, the spammers change their addresses and other info daily so that was useless. I add others to my Junk folder for filtering as needed. We each make our own bed and have to lie in it. Like Karma! BTW I have enjoyed many of your on-topic posts and look forward to more in r.p.m. Thank you! I really look forward to posting and reading about ponds and fish in peace again. -- ZB.... Frugal ponding since 1995. rec.ponder since late 1996. My Pond & Aquarium Pages: http://tinyurl.com/9do58 ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({* ------- I forgot more about ponds and koi than I'll ever know! |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
"Derek Broughton" wrote in message ... Gail Futoran wrote: "Gill Passman" wrote in message ... Agreed....it also means that a poster needs to use a valid email address....I guess if they make a contraversial post with a fake address then the post would just remain removed - and so it should be. Damn. I hadn't thought about that one. However,... In a case like mine (and Ed Aston's) where the trolls use legitimate address to impersonate their "targets" and/or post to porn sites and groups, there is no way a legitimate address should have to be given. Isn't this part of the reason for a moderated group - to avoid these things from continuing? All those who appear to be moderators here have my legitimate e-mail address. I use an invalid email address to post. It's obvious to any individual what they need to do to send me email, but is that something we ought to be asking moderators to do? I don't know the answer. I do know that if I can't use a munged (I think that's the term) email addy when posting online to minimize spam in my inbox, then I'm going to have to rethink posting online, and I'd rather not do that. Not a problem, I think. If every email has to be valid (if they want moderated posts returned) the software should be able to mung the email addresses. Why have the person's email address show at all? Surely the software can be set to eliminate e-mail addresses or mung them to the point of being useless to spam-bots and trolls. -- ZB.... Frugal ponding since 1995. rec.ponder since late 1996. My Pond & Aquarium Pages: http://tinyurl.com/9do58 ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({* -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
Zëbulon wrote:
"Derek Broughton" wrote in message ... Not a problem, I think. If every email has to be valid (if they want moderated posts returned) the software should be able to mung the email addresses. Why have the person's email address show at all? Surely the software can be set to eliminate e-mail addresses or mung them to the point of being useless to spam-bots and trolls. I could have sworn I just said that... There has to be _something_ in the address line, or it's not a valid news message according to the RFC (I think - I could be wrong). It certainly doesn't have to be usable. For the record, I was thinking of converting 'Derek ' to 'Derek xxx@xxx'. Keeping the alias used by the poster is convenient because most of us have software that uses that for the salutation, and it's user selectable anyway, so if you don't want your own name there it won't be. -- derek |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
"Derek Broughton" wrote in message ... Zëbulon wrote: "Derek Broughton" wrote in message ... Not a problem, I think. If every email has to be valid (if they want moderated posts returned) the software should be able to mung the email addresses. Why have the person's email address show at all? Surely the software can be set to eliminate e-mail addresses or mung them to the point of being useless to spam-bots and trolls. I could have sworn I just said that... There has to be _something_ in the address line, or it's not a valid news message according to the RFC (I think - I could be wrong). It certainly doesn't have to be usable. For the record, I was thinking of converting 'Derek ' to 'Derek xxx@xxx'. Keeping the alias used by the poster is convenient because most of us have software that uses that for the salutation, and it's user selectable anyway, so if you don't want your own name there it won't be. -- derek ================================== I for one would like to keep my e-mail address private in some way. I'm sure that question will come up at the right time and will be answered for us. -- ZB.... Frugal ponding since 1995. rec.ponder since late 1996. My Pond & Aquarium Pages: http://tinyurl.com/9do58 ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({* -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
So how do I kill off a heron thats eating my koi
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 11:13:28 -0600, Zëbulon
wrote: "Derek Broughton" wrote in message ... Gail Futoran wrote: "Gill Passman" wrote in message ... Agreed....it also means that a poster needs to use a valid email address....I guess if they make a contraversial post with a fake address then the post would just remain removed - and so it should be. Damn. I hadn't thought about that one. However,... In a case like mine (and Ed Aston's) where the trolls use legitimate address to impersonate their "targets" and/or post to porn sites and groups, there is no way a legitimate address should have to be given. Isn't this part of the reason for a moderated group - to avoid these things from continuing? All those who appear to be moderators here have my legitimate e-mail Trust me Carol, you and your supporters email addys were in the so called poprn grups long before anyone here snatched them up and placed them there. Best check what Randy does for starters. address. I use an invalid email address to post. It's obvious to any individual what they need to do to send me email, but is that something we ought to be asking moderators to do? I don't know the answer. I do know that if I can't use a munged (I think that's the term) email addy when posting online to minimize spam in my inbox, then I'm going to have to rethink posting online, and I'd rather not do that. Not a problem, I think. If every email has to be valid (if they want moderated posts returned) the software should be able to mung the email addresses. Why have the person's email address show at all? Surely the software can be set to eliminate e-mail addresses or mung them to the point of being useless to spam-bots and trolls. -- snip some crap ------- I forgot more about ponds and koi than I'll ever know! |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Thats it, i'm off. | United Kingdom | |||
Softening water.......no Koi lo thats not how its done. | Freshwater Aquaria Plants | |||
Cheapest hedge trimmer thats recommended - good time of year to buy | United Kingdom | |||
Thats it! "Silver Vine" the stupid thing!! Sheesh! | Gardening |