Prev: Simulink Three-phase source waveform
Next: read serial port in real time
From: Jan Simon on 3 Jun 2010 14:50
Dear Steve!

> Don't forget, if you feel the need to respond to spam, *snip* out any URLs
> or email addresses in your reply. Otherwise you're just giving the spammer
> more advertising.

Sorry, you are absolutely right (serious). I admit I have been too deeply impressed by the message so I stopped thinking clearly. The spammer did not waste time in offering any shoes, pills or jobs. No, he directly offered money for nothing and included a warning about "high security risks". This is beyond the horizon of my imagination.

However, replying to spam was silly. As compensation I could offer all CSSMers, who send me her/his banking account number, name and address the half of all 500$ payments I get from clicking to *snip*.

I do not understand why the message has been tagged with "us".

Kind regards, Jan
From: sscnekro on 3 Jun 2010 15:35
Hey guys,

> I do not understand why the message has been tagged with "us".

this is also what I was wondering about. I doubt us would have tagged a spam post by us (as is displayed under the post). On the other hand, as spammer, I would use his nick as he is a frequent poster.

I just wonder about still more features of this site... and just cannot stop wondering as this site gathers together smartest brains (do not count myself there). I simply cannot believe there 'd not be easy or feasible way to upgrade the security, readability, informational value added and many other features of the newsgroup, while keeping it as plain as possible...
From: Walter Roberson on 3 Jun 2010 16:09
sscnekro wrote:

> I just wonder about still more features of this site... and just cannot
> stop wondering as this site gathers together smartest brains (do not
> count myself there). I simply cannot believe there 'd not be easy or
> feasible way to upgrade the security, readability, informational value
> added and many other features of the newsgroup, while keeping it as
> plain as possible...


The spam was posted from a Cell Phone to Internet gateway, and was posted
through Google Groups, not on Mathworks web site. It is not feasible for
Mathworks to moderate all messages coming in from Usenet, at least not without
unacceptable delays in posting messages (e.g., who would do the moderation
overnight North American time, or on weekends or holidays?)
From: sscnekro on 3 Jun 2010 16:56

> The spam was posted from a Cell Phone to Internet gateway, and was posted
> through Google Groups, not on Mathworks web site. It is not feasible for
> Mathworks to moderate all messages coming in from Usenet, at least not without
> unacceptable delays in posting messages (e.g., who would do the moderation
> overnight North American time, or on weekends or holidays?)

With all respect, don't tell me this things. Call it moderation, oversight, security management, maintenance, whatever. It's pretty messy here... and if the tone of this post is sharp, it's not because of you, but bcs of the ... lil innocent difference btw community and newsgroup e-mail I discovered a bit too late. Meanwhile I changed the latter, but the Edit community profile site is utterly misleading in this respect and - borrowing a phrase from you, *that must stop*.
From: us on 3 Jun 2010 17:32
"Jan Simon"
> I do not understand why the message has been tagged with "us".

jan
i started to tag the spam that i visited with ...us...
why would i do that:
- most CSSMers obviously use the spam tag
- if there's a lot of spam, i often forget, which one i've visited already
- since TMW's reader is notoriously slow, i don't want to open sites unnecessarily
- if the spam gets removed, the us-tag is gone as well

that's all: an old CSSMer just getting older...
:-)
urs
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Simulink Three-phase source waveform
Next: read serial port in real time