Google does NOT leave out headers. It hides them on Google (and only on google) Do you want to see yours? If a message has no headers it doesn't exist.
With a indepant newserver and a anonymous service. Why bother?
Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "....what a ride!"
On Sun, 4 Jun 2006 1:38:04 -0400, Her Subj. wrote (in message ):
In the "about" section of builtbywendy it says she is working with Simplicity on a line of patterns that will be released in July. If you really want
*that* pattern, you might wait until July and see if it's in the Simplicity line. Then again, you could always practice matching plaids on similar patterns through June and be all ready to make this particular dress by July!
I know. I'm just annoying like that... :)
Never judge a book by it's cover! I have no problem telling lies to large corporations. They lie to us all the time. Perhaps if I said I alter the truth, that might be a better phrase. You want my age,34 sounds good, You want my address, oops I gave you the one for a house I lived in when I was growing up, You want my income range over a million sounds good to me. As Joy said, they get all that off my credit card if they really want it. There is a chain in Florida, Publix Markets, they offer good prices and great deals without key tags. When we have visited down there that's where I would shop. I saved more money and didn't have to give out a bunch of information I didn't want to give. There is a chain in Western MA.called Big Y, they were happy with with my name and daughters address. She didn't mind if I used it, they have all her information anyhow. Stop and Shop is another story, they are offering a key tag that also contains you credit card information. I can't think of anything worse than that or the Exon-Mobil key tag. Lose that and you've lost your credit rating. People line up for them in droves. I like getting good saving, I don't like they way they go about it. Juno
You're talking about me again... S'not fair!
You packed yet, Miz K?
The only way to truly post anonymously is to use a remailer. Your best bet is to use a dedicated news client like MT Newswatcher, Unison, or MacSoup--- or, if you have a shell and don't mind using the command line, there's tin or any number of other Unix news readers you could use. I don't usually bother and have been using MT-NW for years. It allows complex filtering and threading as well as some degree of flexibility with your headers plus additional headers. And best of all, it's free. Here are some news client reviews:
You might also want to look on VersionTracker...
If you prefer more online security (and you should), yes there are ways to fake your headers but your best, easiest bet is to use a subscription news service like SuperNews, GigaNews, etc, and never post your real email address. Instead use a yahoo or gmail address as you currently do and "munge' the address.
And don't let anyone tell you it's wrong to post a munged address (ie snipped-for-privacy@nospam.comcast.net) or a fake one. That is standard operating procedure given all the spam bots and nitwits on the internet. And FYI, it is extremely bad form for someone to run a traceroute on you and then post the results to usenet. You can avoid that by using a real news client and a reliable news service. I've been using Giganews for years and have never had a single issue with them. Good luck.
Phae
I've been packed for two weeks! Can you tell I'm a little anxious about getting there?
Karen Maslowski in Cincinnati
Kate Dicey wrote:
Ooooops. Posting while tired. Thanks.
No, more like I can't remember whether various NGs and mailing lists prefer top posting or bottom posting (partly because I think it's as equally important an issue as whether to put toilet paper on the holder with the paper going over the top or under the bottom)
Yes, but if you don't have the card with you, then you can plunk in your phone number.
They still give your originating IP address.
But a munged address must end in ".invalid" to avoid messing up legitimate users along with the spammers, and to reduce the amount of the resources stolen when a spammer sends mail to the fake address. (The message may not reach *you*, but it goes *somewhere* -- the least-damaging place for it to go is the .invalid domain.)
And it *is* wrong to make your munge into an I.Q. test or a cute puzzle (for example, "do to my address what androcles did to the lion"
-- there was a non-ASCII character called "thorn" in the address.)
I have found that in the body of a message, just spelling out the punctuation and adding spaces where required works fine. It would be easy for a spammer to write a program to substitute "@" for "at", but as long as there are billions of unmunged address scattered around free for the taking -- and as long as it costs *nothing* to send mail to billions of invalid addresses -- no spammer is going to bother.
Joy Beeson
No. There is absolutely nothing wrong with munging your address in an obvious and considerate manner. Otherwise you'll be the target of every spam bot on the internet. Of course it should be done courteously so that others can easily tell before they attempt to send you email. But there is no rule that dictates exactly how that must be done. Invalid email goes nowhere, btw, and that is the whole point. Undeliverable mail may bounce back to the person running the spam bot (the sender) and that is the problem of the sender and the mail server--- not yours or mine.
It is also the problem of the legitimate server that has to take time out from handling legitimate messages to bounce the spam. And if you use a domain name other than "invalid", your made-up address might be somebody's real address.
Bounced spam is *never* the problem of the sender -- they *always* forge the return address.
So send your spam to .invalid -- it doesn't cost you any trouble, and it postpones the day when everybody has to whitelist.
Joy Beeson
When the so-called "legitimate servers" start to clamp down on the spammers from whom they are making big bucks, then maybe I will have a care. Until then, I assure you I won't lose a wink of sleep over how I instruct my news client to post my email address in my headers.
To start with, I set up filters on my webmail and regular email accounts so not much spam gets by them. What does get by I have forwarded to my central account (IOW, I almost never look at mail on a web page). For some time now, I've used a spam blocker that *prevents* my central account server from even sending me spam. It doesn't just delete spam after it is downloaded onto my computer or put it in a junk file. I don't see it because it's stopped at the source. My computer is never bothered with having to download it because my software goes out to my main server, checks my mail there and leaves all the spam on the server which I have instructed, via my emailer's preferences, to delete all my mail after a certain length of time. Contrary to your assertions, that spam does not get bounced anywhere; it gets deleted.
How does it know what is spam? Bayesian filters and input from me. It gives me a list of anything newly suspicious. That list includes only the sender's name and the subject. Days go by without a single such notification because I have it very well trained. I am explaining this out of courtesy to correct your misunderstanding. To reiterate, I am not bouncing anything. I am having it deleted before it ever reaches my computer.
I've taken care of my responsibility. Now, with all due respect, it's your task to take care of your responsibilities as you see them and to not make erroneous assumptions or presume to tell me or others how to handle ours.
Phae
My ISP offers a filtering service and it's pretty good. It also allows me to go look at the mail it has blocked, and to delete it or move it to my mailbox. I have gotten into the habit of checking because for some reason, the filter does not like my cousin's AOL address. No matter how many times I tell it to add the address to the "let 'em in" list, it blocks her mail.
Most ISPs have filters. My ISP also does a good deal of filtering but my software does a much better job with the more sophisticated, virulent spammers and precludes my having to open my ISP's web site. Your ISP likely has a temporary or permanent block on the entire AOL domain. Some of the more responsible ISPs will block an entire domain when it allows too many spammers to send from that domain or when they think a domain has done too little to prevent denial of service attacks. AOL is infamous for both IIRC. Another possibility is that you have blocked another AOL address and the filtering mechanism isn't sophisticated enough to know the difference.
OB-SEW: Where on the internet is a good place to get nice but reasonably priced buttons?
The "so-called legitimate server" being referenced is not the (accursed) one doing the sending, it is the one that is the recipient of the spam- trapped addy. Back when spam trapping first became popular, one of the methods was to specify snipped-for-privacy@bogus.com. Problem was, there really *was* a valid bogus.com, which began getting all the spam messages. Naturally it "merely" bounced them, but even bouncing takes non-zero time and it built into quite a load. And, bogus.com was quite innocent in the whole mess, their mail server required proper authentication. Well, as innocent as they could be given that they chose a lame domain name. :-)
It was that experience that brought about RFC 2606 and the .invalid TLD
I belong to two newsgroups that prefer bottom posting. Both are "help me operate this undocumented program" groups, and they want a complete record of everything you've tried before suggesting something new.
Business e-mail prefers top posting, but I don't know of any newsgroups that prefer it. I'd appreciate the names of a couple of examples, and an explanation of why they prefer it.
Every other newsgroup I've been in prefers "quote and response" posting -- that is, you snip out everything that you are not responding to, and put your reply immediately below the bit that you are responding to.
If you also have a response to another part of the post, you put that quote after your response to the first quote, then put your response to the second quote after the second quote. If the quotes are not in the same order as in the original message, mention this and explain why.
When snipping, it is very important to keep the attributions straight, so that you don't say "Alice said" when it was Bob who said it.
In groups that generate long threads -- in the literary groups, threads hundreds of posts long are not at all remarkable -- posters can get quite vicious about proper posting. Legend has it that the late Damon Knight, the founder of many venerable SF institutions, was driven out of the sf newsgroups because he couldn't learn quote-and-response.
In sewing newsgroups, threads tend to be fairly short -- and we tend to assume that writing well isn't as important as sewing well -- so we are more tolerant of awkward posting than most still-functioning newsgroups.
But writing a message that can be read, rather than deciphered, is still desirable.
Joy Beeson
On Tue, 6 Jun 2006 22:27:44 -0400, Joy Beeson wrote (in message ):
alt.support.arthritis *definitely* prefers top posting. Too many of us have hand issues that make scrolling difficult so we want the current reply at the top. If you need refreshing, you can choose to scroll down.
On most groups, whether I actually scroll down to read the latest reply is a function of my interest in the discussion and my current level of hand pain. After all, why aggravate the pain in my hands with computer work when I'd much rather do so with sewing and cooking? ;)
InspirePoint website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.