Re: Banned URL
From: Management (charlienospam_at_peartreegreen.org)
Date: 10/30/05
- Next message: ShadowEyez: "Re: Wireless security"
- Previous message: Anders: "Re: Someone's Busy Scanning"
- In reply to: Matt Silberstein: "Re: Banned URL"
- Next in thread: Jim Watt: "Re: Banned URL"
- Reply:(deleted message) Jim Watt: "Re: Banned URL"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 14:46:59 +0000
Matt Silberstein wrote:
<SNIP>
>>"DULLES, VA - Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - America Online continues to
>>lead the fight against spam and as a result, AOL members are
>>increasingly enjoying a spam-free email experience. Today, AOL
>>announced that spam is down more than 85% on the service, as measured
>>by member referrals, and AOL's anti-spam filters are blocking more
>>than 1.4 billion pieces of spam each day, as compared to a high of
>>2.4 billion messages blocked in a single day in 2003."
<SNIP
>
(Sorry to reply here but I don't see the posts by Mr Watts)
I bet what AOL won't tell us (most likely not even researched) is
the level of false positives, that is, good mail labeled as spam.
Note: "spam is down more than 85% on the service, as measured by
member referrals," Surely means that the number of emails reporting
spam is down by 85%, in other words it is meaningless.
At best they can say that there is around 50% less spam detected by
their filters, which again is pretty meaningless.
And this has nothing to with your original post which was about
censorship :)
Funny old world!
Charlie.
-- Broadcasting to the environs www.radiowymsey.org
- Next message: ShadowEyez: "Re: Wireless security"
- Previous message: Anders: "Re: Someone's Busy Scanning"
- In reply to: Matt Silberstein: "Re: Banned URL"
- Next in thread: Jim Watt: "Re: Banned URL"
- Reply:(deleted message) Jim Watt: "Re: Banned URL"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|