My take on three types of Spammers

1) Acccidental Spammers

They see the group name and think - Wow I have a cool book! Why
wouldn't they be interested? They have to be told we aren't interested
and please don't do it again. This would keep us from being inundated
with every cool book the may offer.

2) There are clueless spammers. Our occasional purveyer of hundreds of
spiritual books probably does not really know what spam is, only that
we have books in our title and boy dooes she//he have books. That
person posts seldom enough that we can convienently ignore the entity.

3) Chronic Spammers, only response is to annoy them as much as they
annoy us.

Addendum:
Trolls - Once upon a time there were three billy goats, who were to go
up to the hillside to make themselves fat, and the name of all three
was "Gruff.".

Orestes wrote:
1) Acccidental Spammers

They see the group name and think - Wow I have a cool book! Why
wouldn't they be interested? They have to be told we aren't interested
and please don't do it again. This would keep us from being inundated
with every cool book the may offer.

2) There are clueless spammers. Our occasional purveyer of hundreds of
spiritual books probably does not really know what spam is, only that
we have books in our title and boy dooes she//he have books. That
person posts seldom enough that we can convienently ignore the entity.

3) Chronic Spammers, only response is to annoy them as much as they
annoy us.

4) People who post definitions of spammers.

On 21 Jun 2006 21:54:00 -0700, "Orestes"
wrote:

1) Acccidental Spammers

They see the group name and think - Wow I have a cool book! Why
wouldn't they be interested? They have to be told we aren't interested
and please don't do it again. This would keep us from being inundated
with every cool book the may offer.

2) There are clueless spammers. Our occasional purveyer of hundreds of
spiritual books probably does not really know what spam is, only that
we have books in our title and boy dooes she//he have books. That
person posts seldom enough that we can convienently ignore the entity.

3) Chronic Spammers, only response is to annoy them as much as they
annoy us.

Or simply ignore them or kill file them.

I don't think annoying them would work - in fact, it would probably
have exactly the opposite reaction. They would then know that
whatever it is they are doing is working - and working well.

How, by the way, do you annoy a spammer? First of all, take into
account that any actual supposed email address from them is a simple
forgery at best - or worse - may be someone the spammer wants to
target - thus making people think that this innocent person is the one
doing the spamming.

I haven't been in this group that long, but it's such a low volume
list I literally haven't seen any spam. I pay for a news hosting
service, so I suspect they are doing one helluva job of spam filtering
before it even gets to me. Come to think of it, the other groups I
visit have little to no spam either. So it's got to be Super News
that is doing the filtering. I haven't thought about until now, but
it just goes to prove that the difference between Super News and my
ISP's news server is like night and day. The extra 10 bucks or so I
pay a month is so worth it.

Well, now I've done it (spammed for Super News). I have become what I
loath! g

Seriously, if you're tired of spam, missing headers, crappy
retention rates, etc., check them out. Nope, I don't work for them
nor do I have any connection to them except just being a happy
customer

I think they may even offer a 3 day trial period.

Regards,

Li