Re: Handling SPAM posts
- From: "Michael C" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 12:58:18 +1000
"Peter Duniho" <NpOeStPeAdM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:op.t9bmgihp8jd0ej@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 17:55:24 -0700, Michael C <mike@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It would benefit those who connect directly, which I would imagine is a
fairly large number.
Well, as near as I can tell, Microsoft is already removing most of the
spam posts from their own server. One of the biggest offenders is the
"paypal accept" messages, and a quick search on Microsoft's current server
state shows none of those messages to be present.
But as I pointed out earlier, removing the messages manually is still
going to result in a wide window of time during which someone would still
wind up downloading the messages. So even with Microsoft removing the
messages, there's a good chance someone using their server will still wind
up getting the messages.
As I said previously, they need to remove them faster. Currently it is
taking days, if it took a few minutes then it would be pretty much
eliminated.
Michael
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Handling SPAM posts
- From: Peter Duniho
- Re: Handling SPAM posts
- References:
- Handling SPAM posts
- From: Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]
- Re: Handling SPAM posts
- From: Rudy Velthuis
- Re: Handling SPAM posts
- From: Ben Voigt [C++ MVP]
- Re: Handling SPAM posts
- From: Peter Duniho
- Re: Handling SPAM posts
- From: Michael C
- Re: Handling SPAM posts
- From: Peter Duniho
- Handling SPAM posts
- Prev by Date: Re: basic question about NetworkStream( read/write, multiple thread)
- Next by Date: Re: ReaderWriterLockSlim + Dispose?
- Previous by thread: Re: Handling SPAM posts
- Next by thread: Re: Handling SPAM posts
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|