Re: [Asrg] [OT] Soundness of silence

Mike Schadone <mike@schadone.com> Mon, 15 June 2009 18:10 UTC

Return-Path: <mike@schadone.com>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E66B3A6CF8 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:10:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qB1Etx1zYS7i for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:10:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from k2smtpout05-01.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (k2smtpout05-01.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net [64.202.189.56]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 080733A6CE7 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:10:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 29496 invoked from network); 15 Jun 2009 18:10:16 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO XPERHOST.XPERCOMM.NET) (216.69.177.57) by k2smtpout05-01.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.189.56) with ESMTP; 15 Jun 2009 18:10:16 -0000
Received: from d-66-212-214-214.cpe.metrocast.net [66.212.214.214] by XPERHOST.XPERCOMM.NET with SMTP; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:09:30 -0700
Message-ID: <4A368E60.7000606@schadone.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:09:36 -0400
From: Mike Schadone <mike@schadone.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090409)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
References: <4A329E38.9010609@tana.it>
In-Reply-To: <4A329E38.9010609@tana.it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Asrg] [OT] Soundness of silence
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:10:12 -0000

Alessandro,

It may have something to do with your messages being filtered into the SPAM folder.  I have been
lurking in this group for a few years trying to keep abreast of the technology.  Of those that post
to the list, you (unfortunately) are the only one who gets sent to the SPAM folder, automatically,
might I add (this is not by my design).  Perhaps others who might be interested in what you have to
say are finding your messages mixed in with the trash also?

Michael Schadone


Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> I've only been subscribed to this list for 18 months, so you will
> forgive me if I haven't yet grasped how it works. I've been receiving
> spam for much longer than that, and lazily waited for someone to reel
> off the rules to kill that plague. It never happened. Why? When I
> subscribed, I thought I'd at least understand that...
> 
> Understanding this list's dynamics is not easier. As in many lists,
> messages that start a new thread are relatively rare. I don't have
> message-per-thread statistics, but usually there are many responses.
> Some messages get no response; for example, Frank sent a message on Spam
> Statistics on April 28, and nobody answered, AFAIK.
> 
> In particular, I'm puzzled as to why I got no answer to my yesterday's
> message. A previous message by Amir, DNS-based Email Sender
> Authentication Mechanisms: a Critical Review, had several responses. The
> subject of my I-D is almost the same, an SMTP extension to manage those
> authentication mechanisms. However, I had exactly zero response. The
> same happened for a similar message I sent on May 25. I cannot believe
> it is by chance. Since it happened twice in a row, there has to be a
> sound reason.
> 
> Possible guesses:
> 

<SNIP>