"Martin" wrote in message
et...

"Jeffrey D Angus" wrote in message
...


Dee D. Flint wrote:
My problem is not the attachments. My ISP kills them but then I get a
message saying that the email has been cleaned so it's still a deluge
of
emails.

Same here, after the first day and a half of the attached exe file
email, road runner kicked in and now I get the "This mail contained
name virus and has been deleted.

Jeff

That's interesting. My ISP doesn't kill the attachments, and that is
actually making it easier for me to get rid of all the follow-on garbage
too. With the NAV email option everything with that attachment gets
routed
immediately to the Deleted Items folder and I don't have to spend time on
the individual messages. Maybe you can get them to quit killing them ;-)



From what I am seeing, the attachments have a myriad of names so that
wouldn't help. Besides, I'd just as soon not download an virus laden
attachments anyway. Besides that, the attachments would make it take
forever to download all the messages. Not a good thing.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

I second that endorsement! Mozilla's (and now Netscape's) junk mail
controls are fantastic!

Cheers,
Fred

Larry Ozarow wrote:
I'm using Mozilla's junk filtering, which has been
terrific. I have it set up to send all "junk" to
a separate Junk folder. I then do a quick check for
false alarms and then delete it all, but you can set
Mozilla to delete it after a period of time automatically.
You train the filter by manually flagging junk for a little
while and then it takes over. In the past couple of days
since I activated it, it's handled well over a hundred
swen messages, with no false alarms and maybe one or two
"misses."

David Stinson wrote:


I've got my mail reader set to download mail every 2 minutes, then the
filters take over. That keeps the server clean. Admittedly, if I
didn't have DSL, it wouldn't work. No dialup could possibly keep up
with the
mess.
The ISPs are going to have to do something soon; if you haven't noticed,
a great many regular users are, for all practical purposes, offline.
73 Dave AB5S



--
+--------------------------------------------+
| Music: http://www3.telus.net/dogstarmusic/ |
| Projects, Vacuum Tubes & other stuff: |
| http://www.dogstar.dantimax.dk |
+--------------------------------------------+

I second that endorsement! Mozilla's (and now Netscape's) junk mail
controls are fantastic!

Cheers,
Fred

Larry Ozarow wrote:
I'm using Mozilla's junk filtering, which has been
terrific. I have it set up to send all "junk" to
a separate Junk folder. I then do a quick check for
false alarms and then delete it all, but you can set
Mozilla to delete it after a period of time automatically.
You train the filter by manually flagging junk for a little
while and then it takes over. In the past couple of days
since I activated it, it's handled well over a hundred
swen messages, with no false alarms and maybe one or two
"misses."

David Stinson wrote:


I've got my mail reader set to download mail every 2 minutes, then the
filters take over. That keeps the server clean. Admittedly, if I
didn't have DSL, it wouldn't work. No dialup could possibly keep up
with the
mess.
The ISPs are going to have to do something soon; if you haven't noticed,
a great many regular users are, for all practical purposes, offline.
73 Dave AB5S



--
+--------------------------------------------+
| Music: http://www3.telus.net/dogstarmusic/ |
| Projects, Vacuum Tubes & other stuff: |
| http://www.dogstar.dantimax.dk |
+--------------------------------------------+

"David Stinson" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Netscape is not going to filter out the stuff on the server. That
quickly fills up and jams everything.

I've got my mail reader set to download mail every 2 minutes, then the
filters take over. That keeps the server clean. Admittedly, if I
didn't
have DSL, it wouldn't work. No dialup could possibly keep up with the
mess.
The ISPs are going to have to do something soon; if you haven't noticed,
a great many regular users are, for all practical purposes, offline.
73 Dave AB5S

I don't think Earthlink seems to care. You end up changing your e-mail
address while they continue to lie about how it is your responsibility to
overcome their software limitations. For them 10 meg is a joke and they
seem to care less if all their mailboxes are always at 10 meg.

"David Stinson" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Netscape is not going to filter out the stuff on the server. That
quickly fills up and jams everything.

I've got my mail reader set to download mail every 2 minutes, then the
filters take over. That keeps the server clean. Admittedly, if I
didn't
have DSL, it wouldn't work. No dialup could possibly keep up with the
mess.
The ISPs are going to have to do something soon; if you haven't noticed,
a great many regular users are, for all practical purposes, offline.
73 Dave AB5S

I don't think Earthlink seems to care. You end up changing your e-mail
address while they continue to lie about how it is your responsibility to
overcome their software limitations. For them 10 meg is a joke and they
seem to care less if all their mailboxes are always at 10 meg.

And they work even better if they are used in conjunction with
SpamBayes from sourceforge. A free baysian email filter that
very reliably marks your incoming email as spam, ham or undecided.
Once trained, I have never had a good email (ham) marked as spam
or undecided.

-Chuck

Fred Nachbaur wrote:
I second that endorsement! Mozilla's (and now Netscape's) junk mail
controls are fantastic!

Cheers,
Fred

Larry Ozarow wrote:

I'm using Mozilla's junk filtering, which has been
terrific. I have it set up to send all "junk" to
a separate Junk folder. I then do a quick check for
false alarms and then delete it all, but you can set
Mozilla to delete it after a period of time automatically.
You train the filter by manually flagging junk for a little
while and then it takes over. In the past couple of days
since I activated it, it's handled well over a hundred
swen messages, with no false alarms and maybe one or two
"misses."

David Stinson wrote:


I've got my mail reader set to download mail every 2 minutes, then
the filters take over. That keeps the server clean. Admittedly, if I
didn't have DSL, it wouldn't work. No dialup could possibly keep up
with the
mess.
The ISPs are going to have to do something soon; if you haven't noticed,
a great many regular users are, for all practical purposes, offline.
73 Dave AB5S

And they work even better if they are used in conjunction with
SpamBayes from sourceforge. A free baysian email filter that
very reliably marks your incoming email as spam, ham or undecided.
Once trained, I have never had a good email (ham) marked as spam
or undecided.

-Chuck

Fred Nachbaur wrote:
I second that endorsement! Mozilla's (and now Netscape's) junk mail
controls are fantastic!

Cheers,
Fred

Larry Ozarow wrote:

I'm using Mozilla's junk filtering, which has been
terrific. I have it set up to send all "junk" to
a separate Junk folder. I then do a quick check for
false alarms and then delete it all, but you can set
Mozilla to delete it after a period of time automatically.
You train the filter by manually flagging junk for a little
while and then it takes over. In the past couple of days
since I activated it, it's handled well over a hundred
swen messages, with no false alarms and maybe one or two
"misses."

David Stinson wrote:


I've got my mail reader set to download mail every 2 minutes, then
the filters take over. That keeps the server clean. Admittedly, if I
didn't have DSL, it wouldn't work. No dialup could possibly keep up
with the
mess.
The ISPs are going to have to do something soon; if you haven't noticed,
a great many regular users are, for all practical purposes, offline.
73 Dave AB5S