Re: spam problem because of this list....
The POP filtering of KMail is inadequate IMHO since it requires user
interaction. One should be able to configure it to delete automatically
anything that matches the base64 code that swen and friends have in common.
I'd also like to see the ability to automatically filter out all binary
attachments.
KMail also ought to have the ability to automatically erase trashed messages
from the server after they are deleted locally. Yes, IMAP is better but there
is no way that KMail not having selective POP delete will impel admins to
abandon POP en masse.
I'm not a programmer but that doesn't seem too hard to implement give the fact
that Netscape 2.0 had the feature.
On September 25, 2003 07:56 pm, Carla Schroder wrote:
> On Thursday 25 September 2003 2:31 pm, Anders Ellenshøj Andersen wrote:
> > On Thursday 25 September 2003 21:33, Carla Schroder wrote:
> > > The solution is better list management. A responsible list manager
> > > munges
> >
> > Another solution using kmail goes like this:
> >
> > 1. Turn on pop filtering for your account.
> >
> > 2. Add filter that fetches all mails that explicitly has your email
> > address in the 'To' header.
> >
> > 3. Add filter that nukes everything else.
> >
> > 4. ...
> >
> > 5. Profit!
> >
> > Anders
> >
> > --
> > This email was generated using KMail from KDE 3.1.3 on Debian GNU/Linux
>
> Heh. good point. I love Kmail, I haven't found anything I need yet that it
> can't do. Except stop the garbage before it hits my server.
>
> Those of us who pay for a limited amount of bandwidth and storage would
> rather not have all that !%$^# spam and virus nonsense hit the server in
> the first place. Who else supports making spam a capital offense?
>
> (only partly kidding....)
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Carla Schroder
> www.tuxcomputing.com
> this message brought to you
> by Libranet 2.8 and Kmail
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Reply to: