| Re: PHP mysql_excape but need to search for those items [message #178463 is a reply to message #178462] |
Tue, 19 June 2012 14:41   |
Jerry Stuckle
Messages: 2598
Registered: September 2010
Karma:
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 6/19/2012 9:36 AM, Arno Welzel wrote:
> Am 18.06.2012 21:34, schrieb Michael Fesser:
>> .oO(Jerry Stuckle)
>>
>>> It's only a puzzle to the stoopid. The instructions are very clear.
>>
>> Sure, but why should anyone do it? It's completely unnecessary work and
>> a sign that you care more about yourself than about others.
>>
>>> And using a munged email address on usenet is quite common for very good
>>> reasons.
>>
>> It's common, but not for good reasons.
>
> Is it?
>
> Valid addresses used in the last couple of days in this group:
>
> jwcarlton(at)gmail(dot)com
> hissoka05(at)gmail(dot)com
> taltene(at)gmail(dot)com
> alur(dot)pradeep(at)gmail(dot)com
> apavluck(at)gmail(dot)com
> ircadhikari(at)gmail(dot)com
> erwinmollerusenet(at)xs4all(dot)nl
> kurtk(at)pobox(dot)com
> usenet(at)arnowelzel(dot)de
> netizen(at)gmx(dot)de
> sheldonlg(at)thevillages(dot)net
> php(at)PointedEars(dot)de
> william(at)TechServSys(dot)com
>
> Valid adresses, but i assume nobody will read e-mail sent there:
>
> nobody(at)spamcop(dot)net
> noonehome(at)chalupasworld(dot)com
> me(at)privacy(dot)net
> Alan_Smith(dot)5cjybz(at)no-mx(dot)httppoint(dot)com
> hellsop(at)ninehells(dot)com
> QUITAESTO(at)QUITAESTO(dot)NOES
>
Guess they don't want anyone contacting them offline.
> Invalid adresses using TLD ".invalid":
>
> alvaro(dot)NOSPAMTHANX(at)demogracia(dot)com(dot)invalid
> tnp(at)invalid(dot)invalid
>
Guess these guys don't want people contacting them offline, either.
> Others - either invalid or "munged" (and also invalid):
>
> sorry_no_mail_here(at)nowhere(dot)dee
> jstucklex(at)attglobal(dot)net
>
Yup, munged. That way people can get ahold of me if they want.
> At least here i can not confirm that it is "common" to munge the sender
> address. Sometimes people use the TLD ".invalid" to indicate that they
> don't want e-mail or they use valid honeypots. The same seems to be true
> for many other newsgroups.
>
So? You're looking at one newsgroup - out of tens of thousands. Hardly
a representative sampling.
>> Although I use my current mail address for many years in Usenet now and
>> even use it for various website subscriptions, my inbox is still almost
>> spam-free because of good and learning filters.
>
> Same here. My usenet address is the one with *least* spam at all - but
> not only because of good filters, but because only a couple of spammers
> per week try to send something - something changed anyway:
>
> < https://arnowelzel.de/munin/arnowelzel.de/root.arnowelzel.de/postgrey_new-y ear.png>
>
>
Thanks, but I don't want false positives kicking out valid customers.
And I really don't care that you care so little about your potential
clients that you would kick out email from them due to a false positive.
So why don't you take your little trollish tirade and stuff it where the
sun doesn't shine - that way it will be right next to your head. 'Cause
I really don't give a damn what you think!
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex(at)attglobal(dot)net
==================
|
|
|
|
Calendar
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
]