Re: possible feature request

Marco Paganini <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.mail.spam.active-spam-killer.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Wes,

> I've been using ASK for quite some time. However, I've been seeing other
> programs similar to ASK that helps with the auto-repliers. They have
> incorporated a "human intervention" in theirs. It is one more step that
> has to be taken in order for the email to go through. A person that gets
> the "please reply to this message...." message, to enter a code number or
> series of characters. From what I've been told, it cuts back quite a bit on
> the spammers that have auto repliers. Recently I've been getting more and
> more seep through the cracks because for the auto repliers.
>
> Now I know about the ones that scan the email for triggers to find the
> number so they can respond with the proper code for a reply and such, but
> wouldn't this slow down the spammers at least a little bit?
>
> Saw another one that sends a reply LINK to the user to click on and they
> enter their email address and a graphic number. Is this possible to add in?

Incorporating some form of "human verification" into ASK would not be
difficult. I'm reluctant to add this feature however, because I believe it
would make the process of sending email to someone very annoying. Some people
have reservations to sending a reply to confirmations. Imagine if we add one
extra step to it...

The option of having a like would make life easier for some people (those
with html-capable mail agents), but unbearable for others (like me, who
prefer a non-html capable mail reader). If you point the URL to a link, you
must also make sure that the website is always resolvable, or else you'll
have senders unable to confirm... Messy, eh?

I'm considering a modification against auto-responders: Right after the
confirmation message is received, we send a quick email telling the sender
that the original email was delivered. If the sender replies to this message
(an autoresponder would), his/her email address gets automatically added to
the ignorelist. I believe this would work.

Regards,
Paga

-- 
Marco Paganini          | UNIX / Linux / Networking
[email protected]   | PGP: http://www.paganini.net/pgp/
http://www.paganini.net | Magnus Frater te spectat...
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 189 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/Mp80L2FWjNfH2XwRAm98AJ4gWlpqFDSSzdt1kaJvQi412VSeiwCgg+/W
w1hcyptXkZuHODlBbNJ/15c=
=Psq7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.