"Matthew G. Saroff (Reply to the pobox address)"
<saroff(_at_)vs(_dot_)lmco(_dot_)com> wrote:
On Oct 28, 11:31am, John Gianni wrote:
Q: What are efficient examples to test anti-spam filters?
I always found posting to usenet groups like alt.mlm (multi-level
marketing) and alt.sex.* seemed to do ok.
I've been told that putting yourself on cyberpromo's remove list works
even better.
Best is probably to collect junk mail you have received and run that
through your battery of tests. This works "best" because it reflects
the type of junk mail your present habits have made you susceptible to.
If you don't normally post to alt.sex.*, alt.mlm, n.a.n-a.*, etc,
then doing so just opens yourself up for different types of junk mail.
Personally, I post a lot to alt.sex.* and n.a.n-a.* and have no problems
with that bulk email. It is all very easily filtered. The stuff I find
most difficult to deal with is the stuff directed at me for my webpages.
Just yesterday I found in my junk mail box a subscription acknowledgment
from <majordomo(_at_)mail-it(_dot_)com>, directly addressed to my
<eli(_at_)netusa(_dot_)net>
account. This was for a mailing list I have never heard of, much less
subscribed to. It apparently exists to discuss theft of service between
webmasters, which I find slightly ironic. It got caught in my junk
mail filter only because I have ^FROM_DAEMON stuff directed to the
junk mail box. ("Junk" mail is higher priority to me than "untagged"
or "spam" mail, both of which boxes end up with most of my bulk email.)
Elijah
------
I /dev/null dupes, no need to CC list posts. It is not my responsibility to
prove to you my mail is not spam, if mail to you bounces it will not be resent.