Re: [Evolution] Replying to spam

[Pete Biggs <pete biggs org uk>]

> > To be honest I think the level of non-caught spam I get just from
> > posting to this list (or any public list) far outweighs the noise
> > associated with replying to spam here! :-)
>
> My apologize, most of the times I'm thinking like you do, but from time
> to time I want to add a note. I'm subscribed to many mailing lists and
> the discussion about spam indeed is higher, than the amount of received
> spams. OTOH false positives from time to time are an issue. I'm
> uncertain, if we should or shouldn't talk about spam from time to time,
> since such discussions might help to keep the amount of spam low.

I didn't really mean the meta-discussion about spam as being noise, more
that the increase in false positives because someone replies to a spam
is minor compared to the overall volume of spam.

> The amount of spam is low, we perhaps get more unwanted snail mail and
> don't talk about it, simply through it away.
<off topic>
In the UK there's a free service where you can request not to receive
snail mail unsolicited advertising - only companies that you have a
"previous relationship" with are allowed to send you things and there
are fines for companies the ignore the request. My paper spam is
virtually zero now.  We have the same for phones and I get virtually no
cold callers.
</off topic>

P.