"Andrew Heenan" <seo2seo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "John Bokma" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote :
>> Spam goes away by reporting it. I've given up, more or
>> less on that. The plan for spam seems still to be to filter it out,
>> despite years and years of proof that filtering *does not work*
>
> *everyone* has given up on reporting it
Not everyone, but close. Which is sad.
> - and the people you report it to have largely given up, too.
I am afraid that those started first, doing nothing. I still report other
forms of spam, and they (the people who *should* do something about it)
make it extremely hard.
> Filtering is not 100%, but considering the huge volumes of spam, it
> really isn't bad.
> Certainly better than doing nothing!
Filtering is just that: doing nothing.
> Just consider: Google's Groups is the source of much usenet spam. I
> don't use it at all for usenet, so I don't know if they have filters
> for incoming spam ... but they sure as hell don't for outgoing.
Google does delete spam, but that's after it has been distributed and
someone complained about it. They don't care much about spam on
blogger/blogspot (their abuse reporting system is fucked, to say it
nicely, and it took me ages to contact finally someone who was able to do
something). If I didn't know better I would almost say Google profits in
some mysterious way from spam.
--
John Bokma http://johnbokma.com/
|
|
