How do you deal with SPAM??

AccuSpam is a much better solution for most people, because you just signup instantly for free and forget about it. I suggest you read more about AccuSpam:

http://forums.speedguide.net/showthread.php?t=149310&page=9

There are major drawbacks to using disposable email addresses as you sugggest:

1. If you give out your email address publicly, e.g. on your business card and/or web site, and value new contacts, then you can not simply dispose of your public email address. Most people value very much their email address and do not want to dispose it once it starts getting spam.

2. You can not control what people will do with your email address when you give it out publicly or even to a group of friends. As we all know, friends do not always do what we want them to do. The loss of control is one of the costs of using email, just like giving out your telephone number and the loss of control is cost signing up for a phone number and receiving phone calls.

3. Tracking which disposeable email address you give to whom is a pain in the arse. And it means every person knows you by a different email address, which means the email address are not intuitive. Instead of myname@domain.com, you end up with GVYF$%*%F@domain.com or myname154653@domain.com. Personally when I compose an email to someone I know well, I type their email address from memory. Do not ask me to remember disposable email addresses of all my friends!


I strongly suggest that hiding in cave is not the appropriate solution to spam. Using AccuSpam, I have no fear to tell you that my email addresses are:

shelby@coolpage.com (business)

coolpage@earthlink.net (personal)

Spammers please email me as much as you want! The more you email me, the more you help me delete your spam and the spam of the other AccuSpam users!

-Shelby Moore
http://AccuSpam.com

 

Direct any future posts you want me to see and reply to the existing AccuSpam thread:

http://forums.speedguide.net/showthread.php?t=149310&page=9

I don't have time to monitor two threads.

Thanks,
-Shelby Moore
http://AccuSpam.com

 

Oh come on now ...

When people email you, they are not giving you permision to be added
to a list in a commercial database. As for the rest of your self-serving
comments, they are nothing more than assurances from someone who
is trying to make money doing what people can easily do themselves.

And even with all those assurances, they're not binding on someone
that you may sell to, or someone that may acquired it in bankrupcy.
The saying: "buyer beware" easily applies to internet services where
you're asked to "trust someone ", with service stable as a "dot com ".

Since it's Olympics time: "beware of geeks bearing gifts ".

 

Simple. Do not use any ISP then to receive your incoming email. Then you can be sure your senders' email addresses are never stored on any server on the internet. That means you will need to run your own SMTP server.

Great advice! Everyone should drop their ISPs. Fabulous advice!

Recently a hacker (or inside job) got millions of email addresses that were stored on AOL servers. Does that mean all those AOL recipients are liable for storing their email on AOL servers?

 

"yourbuddy" wants us all to drop our ISPs. Fabulous legal advice!

 

Interesting, but self-serving, tirade ...
You say that addresses stored on AccuSpam are not stored in a
commercial database?! What name have you come up with then?!

The difference between your remarks and mine are that you are directly
soliciting business, and I am definitely not! As mentioned previously, there
are many email programs that will filter spam very nicely without entrusting
your address book to a third party - like Outlook 2003 or Bloomba or a free
open source add-on program like POPFile. Advice is what was asked for,
and that's what was given. Then, you came along with the "commercial
pitch" that neglected (and still neglects) to acknowledge the very real
concerns - that you seem to think are resolved just by you saying so.

If people want to entrust their addressbooks to a commercial third party
(even though they don't have permission from the "owner" of the email
address to do so) then that's freedom and democracy for you.

 

By the way ...

I mentioned invasion of privacy.
You mentioned Lawyers (and disliking them) and getting sued, etc.

Interesting that you should immediately take that stance.

 

Why should they not, when you do?

You trust all your senders' email addresses to your ISP every time you receive their email.

 

Why you mention privacy of email addresses when it is common knowledge that every ISP on the internet stores the addresses of senders of email for it's recipients?

If you trust the ISP to delete them and not misuse them, why not trust AccuSpam. AccuSpam is just another ISP. BTW, AccuSpam automatically deletes them after 90 days (by default and you can choose 1 to 256 day settings).

The EFF advises server side solution and storing of patterns on the server?

http://forums.speedguide.net/showpost.php?p=1386091&postcount=123

http://www.eff.org/

"EFF is a nonprofit group of passionate people — lawyers, volunteers, and visionaries — working to protect your digital rights ".

Did you know that many major ISPs, e.g. Earthlink.net, offer server side whitelist storage?

Did you know that MOST ISPs offer server side storage of email addresses in WebMail?

 

AccuSpam ...

Can you (and will you) guarantee that you will not sell the addresses?,
and will you guarantee this will be applied/enforced with any purchasor?
Can you enforce this guarantee in a business "takeover" or bankrupcy?

Let's be clear about this (read the posts). I didn't attack you personally!
I questioned the breach of privacy/confidentiality that is inherent in your
product. You, on the other hand, have been combative from the start.

 

Your personal attacks include "geek ", "tirade ", "self-serving ", etc..

The legal license for AccuSpam is on the AccuSpam.com with the answer to your legal questions.

"yourbuddy ", I suggest you compare and contrast AccuSpam's license to your own ISP's license which you use every day you receive email.

You are asking to make something private, which is not private. AccuSpam in no way increases unprivacy of your email address. As soon as you use an email address to send an email over SMTP, it is no longer private. So any charge of privacy loss is silly.

There are federal laws (ECMA I believe) which covern the use of email addresses by ISPs such as your ISP and AccuSpam. AccuSpam has to obey the law, just like any other ISP you use.

 

Now that sounds a lot like "I could sell the addresses if I wanted to,
because I don't consider them private, but already in public domain ".
That's cute, it really gives me a lot of confidence in your privacy.

From your description of your product, it sounds very much like what
SpamCop and Spamhaus have been doing for many years. Good luck!
The "SenderID" method proposed by "Uncle Bill" sounds much better.

"tirade" and "self-serving" are simple statements of fact (that's what
you were doing), not personal attacks. "geeks" (note plural, therefore
not personal) was quote from another source, used in general sense.

 

That is not what I wrote in this thread. It your propoganda and spin.

I wrote what any lawyer would advise me to write, which is read the license.

"cute" is factual word in your mind I guess. I always thought it was subjective word.

You obviously do not have a clue, if you do not understand they are all totally different from each other in algorithm.

One is baffled as to what AccuSpam "description" you are referring to. Certainly not this one:

http://forums.speedguide.net/showpost.php?p=1384560&postcount=114

Your email address is your "SenderID ". We already can identify the sender. The spoofing issue is handled by our algorithm.

Apparently do not have enough understanding of technology to understand that it is impossible to create 100% secure channel in any form of communication.

The bottom line is whom do you trust? I trust 1000s of other users which correlate to my decisions as to what is spam, much more than I trust some central authority to decide and police what is spam. The internet community already had this discussion:

http://forum.icann.org/lists/stld-rfp-mail

"cute "

So I guess you will stop using your ISP now to keep your senders' email addresses from ending up in a "commercial database "? That is what you are advising right? Do not allow any ISP to store your senders' email addresses right?

 

My two cents ......
Great dialogue from this reader's perspective re: AccuSpam's defense of his product. I've read enough to say - yup, I'm certainly going to try it.

 

Accuspam and Tony T. are (so it appears from the extensive post at
http://forums.speedguide.net) a "tag-team" made up of Tony (apparently
a salesman or investor) and with accuspam (apparently the programmer).

They are just using WindowsBBS as a means of advertising, as they have
at speedguide.net. I don't mind recommendations from users, but this is
just advertising. It actually amounts to what could be considered spam.

Anyone (like accuspam) that says that they can ID the source of email
100%, could have an interesting conversation with Bill Gates (who is the
one proposing "SenderID ", spending millions to promote it as a standard).

If Microsoft can't (the way the Internet works, right now) ID the source
100% (and they would like to - so they can prosecute "spammers" using
Hotmail) - then AccuSpam's claims just sound a lot like advertising hype.

There is a huge difference in an ISP having "transient" access to an email
address and it being given without permission to a third party for storage
in a commercial database (who will not guarantee to keep them private).

SpamCop and Spamhaus already do similar (if not the same) things as the
upstart AccuSpam (only a couple of months old). SpamCop also depends
(in part) on member "snitches" and an algorithm also not 100% accurate.

AccuSpam would have you believe that they have found the "Holy Grail "
of preventing "spam ", but all they have found is another way to present
a proposed solution (that involves their clients telling them what's spam).

Yes, of course "the algorithm" is different than SpamCop's (otherwise
Julian Haight would have words with AccuSpam), but it's just some math
to "try" to catch spam (something SpamCop has been doing for years).

So, AccuSpam (not you) tries to decide what "spam" is, and other users
try to tell them what "spam" is to them, and AccuSpam says that's 100%
spam control. It's interesting, but not the "be all" solution they're selling.

Please tell me otherwise, but I have seen no mention in the "technical
press" with headlines about AccuSpam and the elimination of "spam ".
Surely they would mention "the final solution" to the "spam" problem.

 

Below (copied from another website) is apparently what your contacts
get when they try to send you legitimate email. This type of C/R system
has been around (in one form or another) for a long time, and it does not
work (at least not very well). Most people (lots anyway) will not respond
to a C/R system, and commercial enterprises sending out automated mail
(receipts, etc.) or manual email (support, etc.) will not respond to them.

You are "forced" to respond to AccuSpam and then "forced" to have your
address included in their commercial database if you want to send any
legitimate email to users of AccuSpam. Personally, I would let my contact
know (phone or fax, I presume) that I don't appreciate being coerced.

Also, there are several email programs that will allow you to "whitelist "
your address book and auto-respond with a C/R message if they are not.
Courier (email program - has a Forum on WindowsBBS) can do this very
nicely. Why would anyone need AccuSpam to "harass" your contacts,
when you can do it yourself (point being, you would/should not do this).
Is this what you want your correspondents to get from AccuSpam:

<quote>

Our anti-spam system is returning your email below.
Please RE-SEND your email by clicking the link to our web
page Contact Form as follows:

http://accuspam.com?kM,vbrJT

After using our Contact Form once, you will be able to send us email
directly. To permanently enable you to email us without ever using our
Contact Form again, simply ask us to add you to our permanent Approved
Senders list.

If you do not use our Contact Form to re-send your email below,
then we can NOT read it.

Note that web page Contact Forms are commonly used by professional web
sites for new contacts.

Apologies for inconvenience, as this is absolutely necessary to eliminate
huge volumes of incoming spam and increase the efficiency and accuracy with
which we can process email from you.

<snip ... AccuSpam advertising deleted>

<end of quote>

 

You may also like to read the following (and others):
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/overseers/2004-q1/msg00141.html

It seems that "mailing lists" also have a problem with AccuSpam.
Some people consider the C/R messages from AccuSpam as "spam ".

I have seen other C/R systems (like AccuSpam) end up on SpamCop's
DNSbl "blacklist ". Then, they wouldn't be able to send their C/R "spam ".

 

Before you attack Tony, you may want to inform yourself that afaik he is a founding member of SpeedGuides (personal friends with owners of the site if I remember correctly) and that may or may not also be the case with WindowsBBS (they use the same format so I think the same owners but I may be mistaken).

Tony has been working with me since 2002 or so, I pay him as a part-time contractor as he created http://www.coolpagehelp.com for my main business. He is not an investor nor a salesman, and not by any stretch of the imagination do I pay his bills. He has a day job. You can ask Tony for his opinion, but my understanding is we are friends more than business related. He has no stake in AccuSpam and has actually put me on notice that he won't be working with me anymore, because he has too many other family priorities. So once again, the underlying theme of your attacks is way off target.

I think Tony started the thread on SpeedGuides, because the role of that forum is to teach, and we have thread there teaching about AccuSpam. If you are not interested in AccuSpam, then you do not have to read it. We are not forcing that thread into anyone's face. We are paying for Overture and Google advertising. The thread exists as a way to keep in touch with our users, as you will find it prominently linked from AccuSpam.com.

Apparently Tony saw this thread at WindowsBBS and (for god's sake I wish he had not), he replied to the thread to offer AccuSpam as a possible solution, because he is using AccuSpam successfully to filter his 2000+ spams a day. He receives 99% spam, so I think he experience with AccuSpam is relevant to the topic of this thread.

Although I wish he would have never posted here. I wish you would go away. I do not have time to keep rebutting your misinformation. I do have more important work to do, but I will admit you are very persistant at spreading libel and false propoganda about AccuSpam.com. Maybe I will need to have our attorney contact "yourbuddy" and make him aware that spreading false information with malicious intent is a civil liability also.

I request that the moderator remove all our posts. I tried to delete them but there is not "delete" button, so I edited all the rebuttals to "yourbuddy" to remove favorable statements about AccuSpam.

Satisfied?

We never wrote "we can ID the source of an email 100% ".

We do not need to. We know that email address of the sender is the sender, or it is forged. That is all we need to know statistically. I could elaborate...ask me in SpeedGuides if you really want to know...

What would happen if the auto-response AccuSpam sends to new sender was sent to the forged sender, and the forged sender sent it back automatically saying "I did not send this email? ".

Ponder that.

AccuSpam is transiently storing the sender address also (delete after 90 days by default). AccuSpam is processing received email just as an ISP does. AccuSpam is an ISP.

Many ISPs offer IMAP which allows you to keep all your email on the ISP server indefinitely, store it in folders on the server, and many ISPs allow you to access your POP or IMAP mailbox via WebMail so you never have to remove it from the mailbox. That is not transient.

SpamCop's algorithm is totally different. For one thing, SpamCop will blacklist any domain that is mention in the content of reported spam, even if that domain was inserted by spammer without the permission.

More importantly, SpamCop is not correlating the votes of other user to the user who is being filtered.

It is so totally different algorithm, I would not know where to begin to correct your misunderstanding. You are way off target.

SpamHaus is purely an IP blacklist. AccuSpam does not even look at IPs.

Your simplistic mind wants to say that all math algorithms are equivalent in performance therefor we can not possibly invent something better?

Have you even tried AccuSpam?

Correct. We are new. So what is your point?

 

"yourbuddy" fails to do his homework again! S/he is a virtual rainbow fountain of lies and misinformation.

That quote from "yourbuddy" is the old version of AccuSpam from last year. It was explicitly stated that the old version of AccuSpam was NOT for individuals and was for companies that received the majority of their new contacts from their web site contact form. In that capacity, the C/R mechanism worked quite well because it was redirecting new senders to the website contact form.

The new version of AccuSpam is a totally different invention that I have been working on for the past 2 - 3 years on and off. It IS for any one who uses email.

The confirmation message that the *FREE* version of AccuSpam sends to senders who are not yet in your Approved Senders list is as follows. Note that it is NOT a C/R system at all. You get the email, even if the sender does not respond. And the *PAID* version of AccuSpam allows you to edit this auto-response. Note that your repeat senders never see this message.


======Start Current AccuSpam Auto-Response=======

I [<recipient email address>] received the email from you <sender email address>],
containing the subject above.

If you need me to reply more urgently, simply click Reply
and send back this entire confirmation email.


If you sent the email to [<recipient email address>], the following
does not apply to you.
If you did NOT send an email to [<recipient email address>],
http://AccuSpam.com can help you stop forgery spam.

=============================
Join free http://AccuSpam.com
100% spam blocked. 0% of non-spam blocked.

======End Current AccuSpam Auto-Response=======

"yourbuddy" in his infinite wisdom fails to do his homework again!

Even though AccuSpam is not C/R anti-spam, any anti-spam that relies on auto-response and runs from your computer is horrible because it only runs when you run your computer, which means the sender may see the auto-response hours or even days after sending you the message. Every one I know sets up their auto-responders at the server level on their ISP.

There other major problems with anti-spam that runs on your computer. I will mention two of the many. First, you download all the spam and VIRUSES to your computer before they are deleted (or not!). Second, they usually tie you to one email program, and even one version of your email program.

So genius "yourbuddy ", what happens when you check your email from WebMail while traveling and your anti-spam program is on your computer at home?

AccuSpam is fully compatible with WebMail and any where you check your email. You could check it while on terminal at airport and you are still protected with AccuSpam.

 

Again you are referring to the old version of AccuSpam from 2003.

AccuSpam has no problems with mailing lists.

Any mailing list that posts an auto-response to the mailing list, has a general problem with internet email.

AccuSpam is NOT a C/R system. Go do your homework before you spread libel. And you are qualified to give legal advice?

As for SpamCop, yes I know it causes a lot of false positives. It is not an anti-spam system I could recommend to any one.

I am not defending C/R systems. I agree they are not that useful. AccuSpam is NOT a C/R system. The old version of AccuSpam was not a generalized C/R system. It was for a specific purpose (some people misused it) and was an intermediary solution while we were working the current AccuSpam.