 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Image Processing Forum » Does the "Report as spam" Button, in Google Groups,... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| aruzinsky... |
 Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 6:49 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
| because, if it does, why do I see so much spam that never disappears? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ImageAnalyst... |
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:02 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sep 4, 12:49 pm, aruzinsky <aruzin... at (no spam) general-cathexis.com> wrote:
[quote:dfa4d103f8]because, if it does, why do I see so much spam that never disappears?
[/quote:dfa4d103f8]
I don't think so. It certainly doesn't put anyone on a blacklist and
prevent them from posting. The only effect I've seen when I've
reported a profile is that if the person has been reported enough, it
won't show you their profile. Big whoop. Like I wanted to see it
anyway. I'm not even sure the "usenet death penalty" (http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet_Death_Penalty) is even implemented
anymore.
I think you can report spammers, ignore them, flame them, or tease
them and none of it increases or decreases their activity because
their ISP's won't act (Hotmail certainly won't as it's in denial and
thinks all spam from their accounts have been spoofed), and the
spammers never check back for replies to their postings (so feel free
to reply to them if you have a witty remark, and give us a chuckle). |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| aruzinsky... |
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 9:59 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sep 5, 10:38 am, Martin Leese <ple... at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID>
wrote:
[quote:7527a64f30]aruzinsky wrote:
I was thinking more of just removing the reported posts. How hard
could that be?
Many people block posts from Google.
--
Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: ple... at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web:http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/
[/quote:7527a64f30]
I meant that Goggle could automatically tally the number of times a
post is reported as spam and once it exceeds a limit, a moderator
could read a list of the titles of such posts and delete them.
Also, Google should provide users with the option to filter out posts
with user selectable words such as "Muhammad," "Muslim," "sneakers,"
"jewelry," etc. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Martin Leese... |
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 10:38 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
aruzinsky wrote:
[quote:c38ac8fff4]I was thinking more of just removing the reported posts. How hard
could that be?
[/quote:c38ac8fff4]
Many people block posts from Google.
--
Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: please at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Martin Leese... |
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:31 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
aruzinsky wrote:
[quote:7240a8c556]On Sep 5, 10:38 am, Martin Leese <ple... at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
wrote:
aruzinsky wrote:
I was thinking more of just removing the reported posts. How hard
could that be?
Many people block posts from Google.
I meant that Goggle could automatically tally the number of times a
post is reported as spam and once it exceeds a limit, a moderator
could read a list of the titles of such posts and delete them.
Also, Google should provide users with the option to filter out posts
with user selectable words such as "Muhammad," "Muslim," "sneakers,"
"jewelry," etc.
[/quote:7240a8c556]
Why would Google want to do that?
Sci.image.processing is part of Usenet News.
Unlike Google Groups, Usenet News is not
controlled by Google. It is therefore not
in Google's commercial interest to clean up
SPAM on Usenet News. On the contrary, it
is in Google's interest that Usenet News
should choke and die.
This neatly explains why Google does so
little to prevent SPAM being introduced via
its servers. It also explains why I no
longer bother to report such SPAM to
groups-abuse at (no spam) google.com, even though the
headers of such posts encourage me to.
Because it is a waste of time.
--
Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: please at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| aruzinsky... |
| Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 4:34 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sep 5, 3:31 pm, Martin Leese <ple... at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID>
wrote:
[quote:015ece8e3b]aruzinsky wrote:
On Sep 5, 10:38 am, Martin Leese <ple... at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
wrote:
aruzinsky wrote:
I was thinking more of just removing the reported posts. How hard
could that be?
Many people block posts from Google.
I meant that Goggle could automatically tally the number of times a
post is reported as spam and once it exceeds a limit, a moderator
could read a list of the titles of such posts and delete them.
Also, Google should provide users with the option to filter out posts
with user selectable words such as "Muhammad," "Muslim," "sneakers,"
"jewelry," etc.
Why would Google want to do that?
Sci.image.processing is part of Usenet News.
Unlike Google Groups, Usenet News is not
controlled by Google. It is therefore not
in Google's commercial interest to clean up
SPAM on Usenet News. On the contrary, it
is in Google's interest that Usenet News
should choke and die.
This neatly explains why Google does so
little to prevent SPAM being introduced via
its servers. It also explains why I no
longer bother to report such SPAM to
groups-ab... at (no spam) google.com, even though the
headers of such posts encourage me to.
Because it is a waste of time.
--
Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: ple... at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web:http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/
[/quote:015ece8e3b]
Because Google's policies make me hate Google. What was Google's
motive for putting a fake "Report Spam" button on their web pages? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Martin Leese... |
| Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 8:49 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
aruzinsky wrote:
[quote:c90658f2c8]On Sep 5, 3:31 pm, Martin Leese <ple... at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
wrote:
....
Sci.image.processing is part of Usenet News.
Unlike Google Groups, Usenet News is not
controlled by Google. It is therefore not
in Google's commercial interest to clean up
SPAM on Usenet News. On the contrary, it
is in Google's interest that Usenet News
should choke and die.
This neatly explains why Google does so
little to prevent SPAM being introduced via
its servers. It also explains why I no
longer bother to report such SPAM to
groups-ab... at (no spam) google.com, even though the
headers of such posts encourage me to.
Because it is a waste of time.
Because Google's policies make me hate Google. What was Google's
motive for putting a fake "Report Spam" button on their web pages?
[/quote:c90658f2c8]
To make you love Google. It is extremely
effective in the short-term, and still works
against most people in the long-term.
--
Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: please at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ImageAnalyst... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 5:39 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sep 4, 12:49 pm, aruzinsky <aruzin... at (no spam) general-cathexis.com> wrote:
[quote:180523e3ac]because, if it does, why do I see so much spam that never disappears?
[/quote:180523e3ac]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well now someone's claiming that it does work:
http://www.embeddedrelated.com/usenet/embedded/show/110453-1.php
If it's like The Mathworks implementation, they require some minimum
number of spam reports before they suppress that thread. The
Mathworks reportedly will suppress a thread once 5 people have
reported it as spam. Since Google handles so many groups, I wouldn't
be surprised if they have some threshold based on the number of group
members, number of postings to that group per day, or some other
formula.
I just wish they could let you report with one click without opening
the message since it gets tedious to open, report, and return to the
newsgroup when the newsgroup is polluted by SO many spams. I might
give it a try for a while though and see if any start disappearing.
I'm sure it would also take a few others to report them as spam as
well (how many, I'm not sure). |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ImageAnalyst... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:11 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 18, 12:58 pm, Martin Leese <ple... at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID>
wrote:
[quote:cb0415e636]I wish you luck. There are certainly plenty
of posts for you to report. (I wont say
which ones as they promote a website that
contains only viruses.) I cannot help as I
browse Usenet News newsgroups using
Thunderbird.
--
Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: ple... at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web:http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/
[/quote:cb0415e636]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin:
I did a cursory look at the thunderbird web site and it look like it's
only email. At least I didn't see anything obvious there that said
anything about newsgroups or a newsreader capability.
http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/features/
Is it one of the separate add-on's that you need to obtain somehow?
What is the link to the newsreader capability of Thunderbird?
I stick with Google because I haven't found any other newsreader that
has these features:
1. free
2. ability to search 15 years of postings (granted, not all that
accurately lately!)
3. ability to display the thread in a tree-format so you know who
responded to whom.
4 notification of which threads, that you've participated in
recently, have new postings. This is VERY helpful to me.
5. Precise time and date of post.
The one thing I hate about Google is no ability to filter postings,
such as the ability to throw out postings with shoes or clothing in
the subject line
Does Thunderbird have each of these features?
Thanks. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Martin Leese... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:58 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
ImageAnalyst wrote:
[quote:c3dc04ac0c]Well now someone's claiming that it does work:
http://www.embeddedrelated.com/usenet/embedded/show/110453-1.php
If it's like The Mathworks implementation, they require some minimum
number of spam reports before they suppress that thread.
....
I might
give it a try for a while though and see if any start disappearing.
I'm sure it would also take a few others to report them as spam as
well (how many, I'm not sure).
[/quote:c3dc04ac0c]
What is required of Google is not suppressing
a thread or account, but suppressing a
*poster* (based on their real e-mail address).
I wish you luck. There are certainly plenty
of posts for you to report. (I wont say
which ones as they promote a website that
contains only viruses.) I cannot help as I
browse Usenet News newsgroups using
Thunderbird.
--
Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: please at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Hendrik van der Heijden... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 12:25 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
ImageAnalyst schrieb:
[quote]On Oct 18, 12:58 pm, Martin Leese <ple... at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
wrote:
I did a cursory look at the thunderbird web site and it look like it's
only email. At least I didn't see anything obvious there that said
anything about newsgroups or a newsreader capability.
[/quote]
TB has a built-in news reader.
[quote]2. ability to search 15 years of postings (granted, not all that
accurately lately!)
[/quote]
TB needs to have news stored locally to search them. If you tell TB
to store everything forever and have a news server which holds the
last 15 years, you can do so with TB.
[quote][...]
Does Thunderbird have each of these features?
[/quote]
Yes, with above constraint.
Hendrik vdH |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Martin Leese... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:39 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
ImageAnalyst wrote:
[quote]Martin:
I did a cursory look at the thunderbird web site and it look like it's
only email. At least I didn't see anything obvious there that said
anything about newsgroups or a newsreader capability.
http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/features/
Is it one of the separate add-on's that you need to obtain somehow?
[/quote]
No, it is built in.
[quote]What is the link to the newsreader capability of Thunderbird?
I stick with Google because I haven't found any other newsreader that
has these features:
1. free
2. ability to search 15 years of postings (granted, not all that
accurately lately!)
3. ability to display the thread in a tree-format so you know who
responded to whom.
4 notification of which threads, that you've participated in
recently, have new postings. This is VERY helpful to me.
5. Precise time and date of post.
The one thing I hate about Google is no ability to filter postings,
such as the ability to throw out postings with shoes or clothing in
the subject line
Does Thunderbird have each of these features?
Thanks.
[/quote]
Thunderbird is free, so download it and try.
I haven't explored all its newsreading
features, but it is unlikely to search
anything like 15 years of postings. This is
because Thunderbird connects to your local
Usenet News server, and the typical local
server does not archive posts (and typically
does not even host all groups). When I want
to delve back into the past then I still use
Google Groups.
--
Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: please at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Niels Fröhling... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:47 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Martin Leese wrote:
[quote]When I want
to delve back into the past then I still use
Google Groups.
[/quote]
And GG prunned the first 10 years of the 15 years last year. I can't find any
of my very first usenet-posts (~'93) anymore, while some time ago (~'05 or so)
it was possible. Even z-net was searchable, not anymore.
GG is a real bad substitute for an archive-system nowadays. I wonder if some
real news-server has an entire group's posts archived (like sip for example).
Ciao
Niels |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Martin Leese... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:25 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Niels Fröhling wrote:
[quote]And GG prunned the first 10 years of the 15 years last year. I can't
find any of my very first usenet-posts (~'93) anymore, while some time
ago (~'05 or so) it was possible. Even z-net was searchable, not anymore.
[/quote]
Didn't know about this. It explains some
peculiar search results I have been getting.
Did Google explain anywhere why they did
this?
[quote]GG is a real bad substitute for an archive-system nowadays. I wonder if
some real news-server has an entire group's posts archived (like sip for
example).
[/quote]
Usenet News servers are organized as a mesh.
I don't know of anybody who holds a complete
archive, and suspect there isn't anyone.
--
Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: please at (no spam) see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Nov 29, 2009 3:23 pm
|
|