Lisp mailing-list ?

Hi,

Do you know a way to receive comp.lang.lisp in mail format ? I am no longer reading Usenet (due to lot of spams) and I miss it. I need to find the perfect Usenet<->mail service (even non free as in free beer)

Apart that, is there any other good lisp mailing-list one should read ?

Regards

xma wrote:Hi,

Do you know a way to receive comp.lang.lisp in mail format ? I am no longer reading Usenet (due to lot of spams) and I miss it. I need to find the perfect Usenet<->mail service (even non free as in free beer)

Apart that, is there any other good lisp mailing-list one should read ?

So you want to read c.l.l in email format because there is too much spam on c.l.l...

Did I get that right? What's the punchline on this one?

I want to get rid of spam from usenet and thus avoid reading/postin from/to usenet thus the need for a usenet<->mail service provider (with spam filtering on their servers). CLL is ont of the groups I was reading (amongst other)

Okay, gotcha. Apologies, I was just chuckling a bit because I always find that email, even with spam filters, has boat-loads of spam. I have finally concluded that there really is no escape from spam, unfortunately.

findinglisp wrote:Okay, gotcha. Apologies, I was just chuckling a bit because I always find that email, even with spam filters, has boat-loads of spam. I have finally concluded that there really is no escape from spam, unfortunately.

Sadly, I agree :/

Parasites always find a way to suck up high-quality resources.

The spam on usenet is something that irritates me as well. I tried creating rules to filter out spam but plenty still got through. I now have only one rule, to filter any subject that doesn't begin with 'Re:' which traps almost all spam. It does filter out the opening message of a thread as well but the relevant parts are usually quoted in the replies. I'm sure there are better ways than this, but it's ok for me.

Concerning my usenet2mail and viceversa, do you have something ?

Dave wrote:The spam on usenet is something that irritates me as well. I tried creating rules to filter out spam but plenty still got through. I now have only one rule, to filter any subject that doesn't begin with 'Re:' which traps almost all spam. It does filter out the opening message of a thread as well but the relevant parts are usually quoted in the replies. I'm sure there are better ways than this, but it's ok for me.

Hm... If that really works, one could just "restore" the opening messages after an answer was sent - but if everyone did this, noone would ever be able to give an answer, because noone would see any Re:-Postings... Except from Spam-Mails, because the Spammers would learn from that.

schoppenhauer wrote:

Dave wrote:The spam on usenet is something that irritates me as well. I tried creating rules to filter out spam but plenty still got through. I now have only one rule, to filter any subject that doesn't begin with 'Re:' which traps almost all spam. It does filter out the opening message of a thread as well but the relevant parts are usually quoted in the replies. I'm sure there are better ways than this, but it's ok for me.

Hm... If that really works, one could just "restore" the opening messages after an answer was sent - but if everyone did this, noone would ever be able to give an answer, because noone would see any Re:-Postings... Except from Spam-Mails, because the Spammers would learn from that.

schoppenhauer.

I accept your point, but I don't take the view that because it wouldn't work if everyone did it that nobody should be allowed to do it. Many people lurk on Usenet or boards such as this and if everyone did that nobody would reply, but I think people should be allowed to lurk if they want to. As I look down my newsreader this morning I don't have a single piece of spam and I'm not in any great hurry to see it back again.

Sorry xma, didn't mean to go off topic.

Hmm, I don't find spam filtering to be especially difficult. This does well for me. It's not 100%, but it cuts the spam down to a trickle that barely registers.

(("from"
  ("sneaker" -1000 nil s)
  ("watches" -1000 nil s)
  ("sales" -1000 nil s)
  ("handbags" -1000 nil s)
  ("thermate" -1000 nil s)
  ("bleachbot" -1000 nil s)
  ("wholesale" -1000 nil s))
 ("subject"
  ("cmsg cancel" -1000 nil s)
  ("adidas" -1000 nil s)
  ("shoes" -1000 nil s)
  ("Gucci" -1000 nil s)
  ("www.top-saler.com" -1000 nil s)
  ("www.world-wholesaler.com" -1000 nil s))
 ("body"
  ("top-saler" -1000 nil s)
  ("wholesaler" -1000 nil s)
  ("Wholesale" -1000 nil s)
  ("watch actress profile" -1000 nil s)))

Paul Donnelly wrote:Hmm, I don't find spam filtering to be especially difficult. This does well for me. It's not 100%, but it cuts the spam down to a trickle that barely registers.

(("from"
  ("sneaker" -1000 nil s)
  ("watches" -1000 nil s)
  ("sales" -1000 nil s)
  ("handbags" -1000 nil s)
  ("thermate" -1000 nil s)
  ("bleachbot" -1000 nil s)
  ("wholesale" -1000 nil s))
 ("subject"
  ("cmsg cancel" -1000 nil s)
  ("adidas" -1000 nil s)
  ("shoes" -1000 nil s)
  ("Gucci" -1000 nil s)
  ("www.top-saler.com" -1000 nil s)
  ("www.world-wholesaler.com" -1000 nil s))
 ("body"
  ("top-saler" -1000 nil s)
  ("wholesaler" -1000 nil s)
  ("Wholesale" -1000 nil s)
  ("watch actress profile" -1000 nil s)))

Looks like Gnus filtering rules. Is this the case ?

xma wrote:Looks like Gnus filtering rules. Is this the case ?

Yes. Perhaps I should have said so, but I figured that it would be obvious to a Gnus user and useless to anyone else.

If you subscribe to comp.lang.lisp through google groups and receive digests, the spam goes through.

However, what happens if you get each message delivered individually? Would gmail apply its spam filters to the traffic?