Sqwertz wrote:

Default User wrote:
maxine in ri wrote:

Seems around 3-4pm pacific time, ggroups introduced a new security
feature that has cut back on the amount of spam that was coming
through their site. *See how long it takes the spammers to figure out
a way around it.

From what I understand, there're actually two. The first is a CAPTCHA
system, the second is a limit on total number of posts per hour or day
or something.

Dude, they've had both those measure for years. *This is why they
suck.


The CAPTCHA system is new, Steve, within the last coupla daze...

It seems to be reducing the number of spam post on this froup
somewhat, but I notice on rec.travel.europe there is still a large -
ish amount of spam.


--
Best
Greg

"Gregory Morrow" wrote

It seems to be reducing the number of spam post on this froup
somewhat, but I notice on rec.travel.europe there is still a large -
ish amount of spam.

Since I set up my new pc a few days ago, I haven't blocked anyone,
including gmail, etc. The spam, knock wood, hasn't been bad at all.

nancy

Nancy2 wrote:

FYI, there is less spam visible through Mozilla than there is on IE.

One of your browsers is seriously broken if you're seeing less spam
VIA Google on one browser than the other.

I suspect it's all in your imagination. It's impossible otherwise.

-sw

maxine in ri wrote:

On May 21, 11:54 pm, Sqwertz wrote:
maxine in ri wrote:

Seems around 3-4pm pacific time, ggroups introduced a new security
feature that has cut back on the amount of spam that was coming
through their site. See how long it takes the spammers to figure out
a way around it.

You're not seeing spam from Google for 5-6 hours and you're claiming
victory?

Read what I said, not what you want to see.

That made no sense at all.

-sw

On May 22, 9:19 pm, Sqwertz wrote:
maxine in ri wrote:

On May 21, 11:54 pm, Sqwertz wrote:
maxine in ri wrote:

Seems around 3-4pm pacific time, ggroups introduced a new security
feature that has cut back on the amount of spam that was coming
through their site. See how long it takes the spammers to figure out
a way around it.

You're not seeing spam from Google for 5-6 hours and you're claiming
victory?

Read what I said, not what you want to see.

That made no sense at all.

-sw

I never claimed victory. I said that there was less spam than
previously.
I didn't say I wasn't seeing spam from _Gmail_, I said there was less.

Reading for comprehension is obviously not a strong point here.

maxine in ri

wrote:

On Wed, 21 May 2008 14:24:53 -0700 (PDT), Nancy2
wrote:

I use GG for posting - haven't seen any security measures here yet,
although someone was complaining about them yesterday. There has
always been a limit on posts per number of hours - I dunno how it
works, but if I get an "error" because I've hit the posting limit,
after a few hours, I can post again. Big whoop.

Gosh, "in the beginning" google nailed me for excessive posting and

You were Google Groping?

all I was doing was posting here on rfc. laugh It was quite a
while before they let me post again and it wasn't measured in hours.
--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
NEW -- Now evaluating a GG-free news feed: http://usenet4all.se

On Thu, 22 May 2008 19:47:05 -0700, Blinky the Shark
wrote:

wrote:


Gosh, "in the beginning" google nailed me for excessive posting and

You were Google Groping?

This was shortly after the Deja switch. There was no shame attached.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smile first

wrote:

On Thu, 22 May 2008 19:47:05 -0700, Blinky the Shark
wrote:

wrote:


Gosh, "in the beginning" google nailed me for excessive posting and

You were Google Groping?

This was shortly after the Deja switch. There was no shame attached.

Well, not felt by Gropers, of course. In other words, just like nobody
looked down on AOLers.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
NEW -- Now evaluating a GG-free news feed: http://usenet4all.se

Sqwertz wrote:

maxine in ri wrote:

On May 21, 11:54 pm, Sqwertz wrote:
maxine in ri wrote:

Seems around 3-4pm pacific time, ggroups introduced a new security
feature that has cut back on the amount of spam that was coming
through their site. See how long it takes the spammers to figure
out a way around it.

You're not seeing spam from Google for 5-6 hours and you're
claiming victory?

Read what I said, not what you want to see.

That made no sense at all.

I have to agree with Maxine. She said, "There's less now, let's see how
it takes the spammers to get around it." I don't see how that is
"claiming victory".




Brian


--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

"Default User" wrote in news:69oct7F34cti2U1
@mid.individual.net:

I have to agree with Maxine. She said, "There's less now, let's see how
it takes the spammers to get around it." I don't see how that is
"claiming victory".




Brian


Can I claim victory...I like food.

--

The house of the burning beet-Alan

A man in line at the bank kept falling over...when he got to a teller he
asked for his balance.

hahabogus wrote in message
...
"Default User" wrote in
:
I have to agree with Maxine. She said, "There's less
now, let's see how it takes the spammers to get
around it." I don't see how that is "claiming victory".

Can I claim victory...I like food.

Only if you supply roasted, poached, jullienned, and sliced
beets as side dishes, a salad, and dessert.

The Ranger

"The Ranger" wrote in
news:nq6dnQgO667zr6rVnZ2dnUVZ_tyknZ2d@rawbandwidth :

Can I claim victory...I like food.

Only if you supply roasted, poached, jullienned, and sliced
beets as side dishes, a salad, and dessert.

The Ranger



What!!?!. Well...only if I get to eat them too.
I sir am a defender of the beet. The beet stops here is my motto, because
it sounds classer than the beet goes on.

--

The house of the burning beet-Alan

A man in line at the bank kept falling over...when he got to a teller he
asked for his balance.

hahabogus wrote:

"Default User" wrote in news:69oct7F34cti2U1
@mid.individual.net:

I have to agree with Maxine. She said, "There's less now, let's see
how it takes the spammers to get around it." I don't see how that is
"claiming victory".

Can I claim victory...I like food.

Yay food.



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

On Fri, 23 May 2008 21:25:50 GMT, hahabogus wrote:

I sir am a defender of the beet. The beet stops here is my motto, because
it sounds classer than the beet goes on.

Well, it's beet tops in my household.

sf
beet greens lover

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smile first

On Thu, 22 May 2008 23:44:47 -0700, Blinky the Shark
wrote:

wrote:

On Thu, 22 May 2008 19:47:05 -0700, Blinky the Shark
wrote:

wrote:


Gosh, "in the beginning" google nailed me for excessive posting and

You were Google Groping?

This was shortly after the Deja switch. There was no shame attached.

Well, not felt by Gropers, of course. In other words, just like nobody
looked down on AOLers.

Lemme tell ya, Blinky.... that line gets old fast. I don't read rfc
from google (not a feature offered by dejanews or even immediately
after google bought it) on a regular basis, but I have to do it on
occasion.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smile first