Subject: Press email list

From: Bruce Momjian <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:11:39 -0500 (EST)

The press email list is getting too many spam messages.  It doesn't make
sense for me to remain in the hope I get see one non-spam message every
six months.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  [email-masked]               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---

From: Bruce Momjian <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:15:37 -0500 (EST)

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I thought we were using greylisting? You should get very little
> spam.

There are about four spams a day, and a valid email perhaps once every
four months.

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 11:16:26 -0800

Joshua D. Drake

-- 
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.503.667.4564
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: PLphp, PLperl - http://www.commandprompt.com/

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 11:21:04 -0800

> There are about four spams a day, and a valid email perhaps once every
O.k. that is what I would expect. I personally get about 12 spams
a day but that is directly to jd@ . Think about how many spams are probably
really being sent to that address.

Honestly Bruce 4 spams is not that bad :) Do you have spam filtering
on your end? Something bayesian should pick up those 4.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:22:25 -0400 (AST)

> I thought we were using greylisting? You should get very little

We have pretty much everything enabled on the lists, including 
Greylisting, but Greylisting doesn't help is someone sends the spam 
through 'legit channels' ... like most anti-spam software, they do have a 
finite lifetime before the spams just work around them ...

press is one of the only lists we run, though, that doesn't restrict 
posters to it (ie. you don't have to be subscribed to post to it), so its 
easier for the stray spam to get through to the subscribers ... not sure 
why we don't have restrict_post set on it though ... JoshB and RobertT are 
both owners of the list, maybe they can comment ... ?

-----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: [email-masked]           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:23:39 -0400 (AST)

> There are about four spams a day, and a valid email perhaps once every

Wow, I'll trade you my mailbox for yours ... *evil grin*  But, I don't 
imagine those 4 are the *only* spam you get each day ... or is it?

----

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 11:32:33 -0800

> posters to it (ie. you don't have to be subscribed to post to it), so 
> its easier for the stray spam to get through to the subscribers ... 
> not sure why we don't have restrict_post set on it though ... JoshB 
> and RobertT are both owners of the list, maybe they can comment ... ?
I am guessing because we don't want people seeking a press contact to 
have to subscribe.

Joshua D. Drake

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:54:04 -0400 (AST)

> I am guessing because we don't want people seeking a press contact to have to 
> subscribe.

Actually, they wouldn't have to ... all that would happen is Robert/Josh 
would get sent an email telling them that the message was there needing to 
be approved ...

----

---

From: Bruce Momjian <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:45:56 -0500 (EST)

> on your end? Something bayesian should pick up those 4.

Well, at this point, 50% of spam I receive that has gotten through my
filters is though the press list, so removing that drops my spam by 1/2.

---

From: Bruce Momjian <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:46:32 -0500 (EST)

> would get sent an email telling them that the message was there needing to 

Yes, originally they didn't want the delay have something having to be
approved, but at this point, it might be the best solution.

---

From: Josh Berkus <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 10:14:04 -0800

Bruce,

> sense for me to remain in the hope I get see one non-spam message every

So, don't.  I'll stay on, I'm used to the spam.  Plus my server filters 
out another 50% of what gets past Marc.

--Josh

---

From: Vishal Kashyap <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 02:26:24 +0530

Josh,

Same problem with in'postgresql.org. I would say I recive tons of SPAMS.

On 1/17/06, Josh Berkus <[email-masked]> wrote:
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>

--
With Best Regards,
Vishal Kashyap.
http://vishalkashyap.tk