spam percentage
in [Fortran]
|
From: Phillip Helbig---undress to reply on 12 Apr 2010 16:23 In article <8628221c-4f10-4829-b389-a5fe8cef4019(a)j21g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, Terence <tbwright(a)cantv.net> writes: > I see, by count, that there are now 1 genuine forran postings per 3 > pages of titles. At 30 odd titles per page, that makes it close to a > 99% spam proportion.Anybody know how something can be done? > Or where to report in Google? Are the spam messages (which seem to be only in c.l.f of the groups I follow) posted THROUGH the Google Groups interface?
From: Gib Bogle on 12 Apr 2010 19:28 Luka Djigas wrote: >... they might start to disregard their users ... and turn into something like aol. Or Microsoft, or Apple.
From: A Watcher on 12 Apr 2010 23:39 Luka Djigas wrote: > On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 18:04:18 -0600, Uno <merrilljensen(a)q.com> wrote: > > >> 48 hours ago, I used google groups to look at the responses I got to the >> thread I started. You can use google to find only the most recent >> threads, as there were about 20 ads for drugs till I got to the first >> topical original post, which was mine. I see none of this spam with NIN. >> >> I've decided to hate google for their role in screwing up free speech on >> usenet, a form of information pollution. They are now on my fox list: >> companies that will never see my money and whose advertised products I >> actively avoid when purchasing. > > > Oh, come on. > > Google isn't bad, per se. It's just that sometimes, even through good intentions, bad results > can arise. > > I see nothing bad in their attempt for example, to allow us to search through usenet archives, > just the opposite. But *they had to be aware* (if they aren't - then that's just lack of thinking > ahead) that once you allow the usenet to be accessed worldwide, you will also have a worldwide > amount of spam (huge). > > The thing about usenet, as we know it, is that its access points have always been local, restricted > to universities, schools, academia and local isp's. In that way, spammers could be quickly dealt > with. At worst, one server could be cut out from the rest, and spam problem solved. > Google through it's "good intentions" made that impossible. Only they can solve it now, and that's a > problem. Since they don't seem that interested n solving it. > > > But, I agree with something; although I've always liked google (I was one of the first gmail/greader > users and much else), I agree they're getting too "powerful" ... and I'm afraid once one has all > that under his own control, they might start to disregard their users ... and turn into something > like aol. > > -- Luka They are already disregarding their users. They only care about power and the money they can make with it.
From: A Watcher on 12 Apr 2010 23:41 Phillip Helbig---undress to reply wrote: > In article > <8628221c-4f10-4829-b389-a5fe8cef4019(a)j21g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, > Terence <tbwright(a)cantv.net> writes: > >> I see, by count, that there are now 1 genuine forran postings per 3 >> pages of titles. At 30 odd titles per page, that makes it close to a >> 99% spam proportion.Anybody know how something can be done? >> Or where to report in Google? > > Are the spam messages (which seem to be only in c.l.f of the groups I > follow) posted THROUGH the Google Groups interface? > comp.os.linux.misc is also afflicted
From: Luka Djigas on 13 Apr 2010 06:15
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:39:39 -0700, A Watcher <stocksami(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >They are already disregarding their users. They only care about power >and the money they can make with it. Ah, let's be fair. In terms of email & (some other stuff) technical support they're still a class above the competition. -- Luka |