On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now read
> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.

Same as comp.lang.c as has been mentioned elsewhere
(<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> for example). Good. I
wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered and
automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they have some
employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how things are
working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have acted much
sooner.

On 01/11/2023 02:09, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now read
>> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.
>
> Same as comp.lang.c as has been mentioned elsewhere
> (<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> for example). Good. I
> wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered and
> automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they have some
> employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
> several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how things are
> working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have acted much
> sooner.
>

What will Google do assuming the spammers just move on to another group? They wouldn't want to make
ALL their groups read only, and it can't be hard for the spammers to identify new target groups that
haven't been locked down yet?

Mike.

In article <7Zt5DHW8FTpPHEedl@bongo-ra.co>,
Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
>Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now read
>> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.
>
>Same as comp.lang.c as has been mentioned elsewhere
>(<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> for example). Good. I
>wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered and
>automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they have some
>employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
>several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how things are
>working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have acted much
>sooner.

The depeering of Google Groups will be the ultimate act of mercy!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Today is not tomorrow, and this world provides no guarantees. -unknown https://mindspring.com

In article <BHKdnWbxN7H8JNz4nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>,
Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> wrote:
>On 01/11/2023 02:09, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now read
>>> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.
>>
>> Same as comp.lang.c as has been mentioned elsewhere
>> (<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> for example). Good. I
>> wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered and
>> automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they have some
>> employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
>> several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how things are
>> working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have acted much
>> sooner.
>>
>
>What will Google do assuming the spammers just move on to another group?
>They wouldn't want to make
>ALL their groups read only, and it can't be hard for the spammers to
>identify new target groups that
>haven't been locked down yet?
>

Talk about stupidity!

Artificial and otherwise!

>Mike.

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Today is not tomorrow, and this world provides no guarantees. -unknown https://mindspring.com

On 10/31/23 21:09, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now read
>> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.
>
> Same as comp.lang.c as has been mentioned elsewhere
> (<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> for example). Good. I
> wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered and
> automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they have some
> employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
> several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how things are
> working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have acted much
> sooner.

Bad actors ruining legitimate experience because of a half-assed
solution, a tale as old as time.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

In article <uhsgkc$1a99v$2@dont-email.me>,
candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
>On 10/31/23 21:09, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now read
>>> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.
>>
>> Same as comp.lang.c as has been mentioned elsewhere
>> (<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> for example). Good. I
>> wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered and
>> automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they have some
>> employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
>> several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how things are
>> working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have acted much
>> sooner.
>
>Bad actors ruining legitimate experience because of a half-assed
>solution, a tale as old as time.

Annd Google is the biggest bad actor out there!

>--
>user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom
>

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Today is not tomorrow, and this world provides no guarantees. -unknown https://mindspring.com

On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 02:35:12 +0000, Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> wrote:
>On 01/11/2023 02:09, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now read
>>> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.
>> Same as comp.lang.c as has been mentioned elsewhere
>> (<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> for example). Good. I
>> wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered and
>> automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they have some
>> employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
>> several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how things are
>> working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have acted much
>> sooner.
>What will Google do assuming the spammers just move on to another group? They wouldn't want to make
>ALL their groups read only, and it can't be hard for the spammers to identify new target groups that
>haven't been locked down yet?

e.g. https://www.usenetarchives.com is afaik read-only, but as for
how complete or searchable any of these gigantic archives might be
has probably already been determined, namely, not totally complete
and what incomplete content they do have is not readily searchable;
and even if google pulled the plug, it's too late to separate what
little could be classified as "legitimate" posts from the billions
of googlespam articles that have already contaminated the archives
to the point where total deletion of all googlegroups.com articles
is the only way to salvage what may not worth saving, irregardless

Mike Terry wrote:
> On 01/11/2023 02:09, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now read
>>> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.
>>
>> Same as  comp.lang.c  as has been mentioned elsewhere
>> (<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>  for example).
>> Good. I
>> wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered and
>> automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they have some
>> employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
>> several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how things are
>> working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have
>> acted much
>> sooner.
>>
>
> What will Google do assuming the spammers just move on to another
> group?  They wouldn't want to make ALL their groups read only, and it
> can't be hard for the spammers to identify new target groups that
> haven't been locked down yet?
>
> Mike.

What I'm hoping is that this is just a temporary measure while they work
something else out. Various admins needed several days - including
false starts - to develop working solutions, Google will have QA
measures in place so they won't be able to move that quickly.

On 2023-11-01 03:09, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now read
>> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.
>
> Same as comp.lang.c as has been mentioned elsewhere
> (<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> for example). Good. I
> wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered and
> automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they have some
> employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
> several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how things are
> working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have acted much
> sooner.
>

Looking at some of the GSpam, I just noticed that GG helpfully adds a
header indicating the spammer's IP, perhaps someone with copies of the
GSpam from recent weeks can see if there is a pattern that can be used
for filtering more specific than just blocking GG.

Enjoy

Jakob
--
Jakob Bohm, CIO, Partner, WiseMo A/S. https://www.wisemo.com
Transformervej 29, 2860 Søborg, Denmark. Direct +45 31 13 16 10
This public discussion message is non-binding and may contain errors.
WiseMo - Remote Service Management for PCs, Phones and Embedded

On 11/1/23 03:40, Andrew wrote:
> Mike Terry wrote:
>> On 01/11/2023 02:09, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
>>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now read
>>>> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.
>>>
>>> Same as  comp.lang.c  as has been mentioned elsewhere
>>> (<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>  for example).
>>> Good. I
>>> wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered and
>>> automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they have
>>> some
>>> employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
>>> several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how things are
>>> working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have
>>> acted much
>>> sooner.
>>>
>>
>> What will Google do assuming the spammers just move on to another
>> group?  They wouldn't want to make ALL their groups read only, and it
>> can't be hard for the spammers to identify new target groups that
>> haven't been locked down yet?
>>
>> Mike.
>
> What I'm hoping is that this is just a temporary measure while they work
> something else out.  Various admins needed several days - including
> false starts - to develop working solutions, Google will have QA
> measures in place so they won't be able to move that quickly.

A man can dream. I'm betting this is a permanent "solution".
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

In article <uht2te$3me4m$1@paganini.bofh.team>,
Andrew <Doug@hyperspace.vogon.gov> wrote:
>Mike Terry wrote:
>> On 01/11/2023 02:09, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
>>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now read
>>>> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.
>>>
>>> Same as� comp.lang.c� as has been mentioned elsewhere
>>> (<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>� for example).
>>> Good. I
>>> wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered and
>>> automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they have some
>>> employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
>>> several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how things are
>>> working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have
>>> acted much
>>> sooner.
>>>
>>
>> What will Google do assuming the spammers just move on to another
>> group?� They wouldn't want to make ALL their groups read only, and it
>> can't be hard for the spammers to identify new target groups that
>> haven't been locked down yet?
>>
>> Mike.
>
>What I'm hoping is that this is just a temporary measure while they work
>something else out. Various admins needed several days - including
>false starts - to develop working solutions, Google will have QA
>measures in place so they won't be able to move that quickly.

Google should be tossing abusers off!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Today is not tomorrow, and this world provides no guarantees. -unknown https://mindspring.com

candycanearter07 wrote:

> On 11/1/23 03:40, Andrew wrote:
>> Mike Terry wrote:
>>> On 01/11/2023 02:09, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
>>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now read
>>>>> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.
>>>>
>>>> Same as  comp.lang.c  as has been mentioned elsewhere
>>>> (<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>  for example).
>>>> Good. I
>>>> wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered and
>>>> automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they have
>>>> some
>>>> employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
>>>> several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how things are
>>>> working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have
>>>> acted much
>>>> sooner.
>>>>
>>>
>>> What will Google do assuming the spammers just move on to another
>>> group?  They wouldn't want to make ALL their groups read only, and it
>>> can't be hard for the spammers to identify new target groups that
>>> haven't been locked down yet?
>>>
>>> Mike.
>>
>> What I'm hoping is that this is just a temporary measure while they work
>> something else out.  Various admins needed several days - including
>> false starts - to develop working solutions, Google will have QA
>> measures in place so they won't be able to move that quickly.

> A man can dream. I'm betting this is a permanent "solution".

I don't know if it is permanent, but it is lazy. If Ray, Adam, I and others
can filter spam, I would think Google could do it.

--
Retro Guy

The Doctor wrote:
> In article <uht2te$3me4m$1@paganini.bofh.team>,
> Andrew <Doug@hyperspace.vogon.gov> wrote:
>> Mike Terry wrote:
>>> On 01/11/2023 02:09, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
>>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now read
>>>>> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.
>>>>
>>>> Same as  comp.lang.c  as has been mentioned elsewhere
>>>> (<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>  for example).
>>>> Good. I
>>>> wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered and
>>>> automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they have some
>>>> employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
>>>> several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how things are
>>>> working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have
>>>> acted much
>>>> sooner.
>>>>
>>>
>>> What will Google do assuming the spammers just move on to another
>>> group?  They wouldn't want to make ALL their groups read only, and it
>>> can't be hard for the spammers to identify new target groups that
>>> haven't been locked down yet?
>>>
>>> Mike.
>>
>> What I'm hoping is that this is just a temporary measure while they work
>> something else out. Various admins needed several days - including
>> false starts - to develop working solutions, Google will have QA
>> measures in place so they won't be able to move that quickly.
>
> Google should be tossing abusers off!
>

If the tossers toss the abusers off, the abusive spammer tossers just
return with new email addresses (and they don't even need to be gmail)
and start tossing their spam around again.
I can't remember, does gmail get checked for spam on their servers? If
it does then they are 80% of the way there.

On 11/1/23 10:01, Andrew wrote:
> The Doctor wrote:
>> In article <uht2te$3me4m$1@paganini.bofh.team>,
>> Andrew  <Doug@hyperspace.vogon.gov> wrote:
>>> Mike Terry wrote:
>>>> On 01/11/2023 02:09, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:32:11 -0500
>>>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Apparently comp.arch, comp.lang.c++, and comp.lang.fortran are now
>>>>>> read
>>>>>> only at google groups to stop the spam floods.
>>>>>
>>>>> Same as  comp.lang.c  as has been mentioned elsewhere
>>>>> (<iMWdnVed06hwqtz4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>  for example).
>>>>> Good. I
>>>>> wonder how that works. Was some algorithm at googlegroups triggered
>>>>> and
>>>>> automatically took the measure (or notified a human) or do they
>>>>> have some
>>>>> employee at Google regularly take a few minutes of their time once per
>>>>> several weeks to have a short look at googlegroups to see how
>>>>> things are
>>>>> working ? I will guess the latter because an algorithm would have
>>>>> acted much
>>>>> sooner.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What will Google do assuming the spammers just move on to another
>>>> group?  They wouldn't want to make ALL their groups read only, and it
>>>> can't be hard for the spammers to identify new target groups that
>>>> haven't been locked down yet?
>>>>
>>>> Mike.
>>>
>>> What I'm hoping is that this is just a temporary measure while they work
>>> something else out.  Various admins needed several days - including
>>> false starts - to develop working solutions, Google will have QA
>>> measures in place so they won't be able to move that quickly.
>>
>> Google should be tossing abusers off!
>>
>
> If the tossers toss the abusers off, the abusive spammer tossers just
> return with new email addresses (and they don't even need to be gmail)
> and start tossing their spam around again.
> I can't remember, does gmail get checked for spam on their servers?  If
> it does then they are 80% of the way there.

There is a spam folder. It's effectiveness is something I'm not sure of.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Le 01/11/2023 à 16:53, candycanearter07 a écrit :

> On 11/1/23 10:01, Andrew wrote:

>> If the tossers toss the abusers off, the abusive spammer tossers just
>> return with new email addresses (and they don't even need to be gmail)
>> and start tossing their spam around again.
>> I can't remember, does gmail get checked for spam on their servers?  If
>> it does then they are 80% of the way there.

> There is a spam folder. It's effectiveness is something I'm not sure of.

Gmail filters a lot of spam, sometimes there is a false positive but it's
rare. Apparently they don't want to use that on Google Groups.

On Wed, 01 Nov 23 15:57:11 +0000
Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:
> Le 01/11/2023 à 16:53, candycanearter07 a écrit :
> > There is a spam folder. It's effectiveness is something I'm not sure of.
>
> Gmail filters a lot of spam, sometimes there is a false positive but it's
> rare.

This has been my experience too and I have been using a gmail address for
at least 15 years. It is very good at filtering incoming spam. Its filter
also gets trained very quickly.

> Apparently they don't want to use that on Google Groups.

Yes and this indicates that they don't give a damn about googlegroups , they
just spend as little time on it as possible. I am guessing that the reason
they haven't shut it down yet is because they don't want to devote the time
to have a meeting of management who are high enough in the hierarchy to make
the decision !

--
It is better to be young , rich , beautiful and healthy than
old , poor , ugly and diseased.
Anonymous

Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 01 Nov 23 15:57:11 +0000
> Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Le 01/11/2023 à 16:53, candycanearter07 a écrit :
> > > There is a spam folder. It's effectiveness is something I'm not sure of.
> >
> > Gmail filters a lot of spam, sometimes there is a false positive but it's
> > rare.
>
> This has been my experience too and I have been using a gmail address for
> at least 15 years. It is very good at filtering incoming spam. Its filter
> also gets trained very quickly.
>
> > Apparently they don't want to use that on Google Groups.
> >
>
> Yes and this indicates that they don't give a damn about googlegroups , they
> just spend as little time on it as possible. I am guessing that the reason
> they haven't shut it down yet is because they don't want to devote the time
> to have a meeting of management who are high enough in the hierarchy to make
> the decision !
>

I think Gmail uses a different mechanism: every time a Gmail user marks
a junkmail as spam Google is aware of it and moves the spam to the
user's junk mailbox. That mechanism is not available to them for News
because News users do not feed back real-time spam reports to them.

That is not intended to be an apologia for Google's neglectful pollution
of Usenet, only stating a view.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.
My pet rock Gordon just is.

No Google Groups articles seen unless poster is whitelisted.

On 11/1/23 11:39, Sn!pe wrote:
> Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 01 Nov 23 15:57:11 +0000
>> Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Le 01/11/2023 à 16:53, candycanearter07 a écrit :
>>>> There is a spam folder. It's effectiveness is something I'm not sure of.
>>>
>>> Gmail filters a lot of spam, sometimes there is a false positive but it's
>>> rare.
>>
>> This has been my experience too and I have been using a gmail address for
>> at least 15 years. It is very good at filtering incoming spam. Its filter
>> also gets trained very quickly.
>>
>>> Apparently they don't want to use that on Google Groups.
>>>
>>
>> Yes and this indicates that they don't give a damn about googlegroups , they
>> just spend as little time on it as possible. I am guessing that the reason
>> they haven't shut it down yet is because they don't want to devote the time
>> to have a meeting of management who are high enough in the hierarchy to make
>> the decision !
>>
>
> I think Gmail uses a different mechanism: every time a Gmail user marks
> a junkmail as spam Google is aware of it and moves the spam to the
> user's junk mailbox. That mechanism is not available to them for News
> because News users do not feed back real-time spam reports to them.
>
> That is not intended to be an apologia for Google's neglectful pollution
> of Usenet, only stating a view.
>

You could still have a "mark as spam" button and have them update the
filters and such. Maybe even have a local newsgroup for dealing with
spam (google-groups.spam or something).
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Le 01/11/2023 à 17:39, snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) a écrit :

> I think Gmail uses a different mechanism: every time a Gmail user marks
> a junkmail as spam Google is aware of it and moves the spam to the
> user's junk mailbox. That mechanism is not available to them for News
> because News users do not feed back real-time spam reports to them.

They did it for the recent flood and it seemed to have worked, maybe not
perfectly but it stopped the spam.

candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
> On 11/1/23 11:39, Sn!pe wrote:
[...]
> > I think Gmail uses a different mechanism: every time a Gmail user marks
> > a junkmail as spam Google is aware of it and moves the spam to the
> > user's junk mailbox. That mechanism is not available to them for News
> > because News users do not feed back real-time spam reports to them.
> >
> > That is not intended to be an apologia for Google's neglectful pollution
> > of Usenet, only stating a view.
>
> You could still have a "mark as spam" button and have them update the
> filters and such. Maybe even have a local newsgroup for dealing with
> spam (google-groups.spam or something).

I think Sn!pe was mainly talking about regular/non-GG users, who can
not - at least not without much effort - report GG spam to Google.

The GG users do have a reporting mechanism - (right-click on the three
vertical dots icon) 'Report message as abuse' -, but it's unlikely that
(m)any GG users can be bothered to use that mechanism, seeing the
immense amount of (GG-generated) spam.

candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
[...]
> >> Yes and this indicates that they don't give a damn about googlegroups ,
> >> they just spend as little time on it as possible. I am guessing that
> >> the reason they haven't shut it down yet is because they don't want to
> >> devote the time to have a meeting of management who are high enough in
> >> the hierarchy to make the decision !
> >>
> >
> > I think Gmail uses a different mechanism: every time a Gmail user marks
> > a junkmail as spam Google is aware of it and moves the spam to the
> > user's junk mailbox. That mechanism is not available to them for News
> > because News users do not feed back real-time spam reports to them.
> >
> > That is not intended to be an apologia for Google's negligent pollution
> > of Usenet, only stating a view.
> >
>
> You could still have a "mark as spam" button and have them update the
> filters and such. Maybe even have a local newsgroup for dealing with
> spam (google-groups.spam or something).
>

But, but, the author of my Newsreader has retired; who will program a
"mark as spam" button for it? I don't read News using a Google program
so there ~is no~ 'feedback to Google' mechanism.

It isn't as though Google have anything to do with Usenet anyway;
they've simply usurped the Usenet group namespace for their ersatz
"Google Groups" mailing list setup.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.
My pet rock Gordon just is.

No Google Groups articles seen unless poster is whitelisted.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday, 01 November 2023 16:39 -0000,
in article <1qjizbc.1d77w5nup213fN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>,
Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think Gmail uses a different mechanism: every time a Gmail user
> marks a junkmail as spam Google is aware of it and moves the spam to
> the user's junk mailbox. That mechanism is not available to them
> for News because News users do not feed back real-time spam reports
> to them.

This is not because the reporting mechanism does not exist, rather
those who are the noisiest regarding spam from, no by, Google Groups
are too lazy to go through Google's reporting process. After all,
taking this action behind the scenes does nothing to boost their quite
meaningless post count.

In the past, sufficient jumping^W reporting through Google Groups
hoops has resulted in the removal of all access to the target groups.

I have not observed a single post in news.admin.net-abuse.email, via
Google Groups, since December, 2018, as this group is inaccessible
from GG.

BTW - Blocking posts based on the appearance of gmail.com or
googlemail.com in the Message-ID is a fools errand, as these do not
occur. M-IDs and References containg "googlegoups.com" should fit the
bill.

- --
David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com>
"There will be more spam." -- Paul Vixie

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iF0EARECAB0WIQSc0FU3XAVGYDjSGUhSvCmZGhLe6wUCZUK5VwAKCRBSvCmZGhLe
6/3VAKCpJ3qPW/2OjOq6zkGOQGpDqr9EqwCg8XjUp0y4bdEVdkg4u0mqoMcjgi0=
=aFK5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> wrote:
>
>What will Google do assuming the spammers just move on to another group? They wouldn't want to make
>ALL their groups read only, and it can't be hard for the spammers to identify new target groups that
>haven't been locked down yet?

That's basically the question.

And comp.os.vms is totally inundated now.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 1 Nov 2023 21:51:38 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> wrote:
>>What will Google do assuming the spammers just move on to another group? They wouldn't want to make
>>ALL their groups read only, and it can't be hard for the spammers to identify new target groups that
>>haven't been locked down yet?
>
>That's basically the question.
>And comp.os.vms is totally inundated now.
>--scott

message-id / reference headers including "googlegroups.com" . . .

comp.os.vms =~ 5370 since 1 May 2023 (average, even below normal)

p.s. seems the goo is doing a lot of newsgroup-shifting lately, reports
of previously mass-googlespammed newsgroups seeing sudden steep declines,
while other previously quiet newsgroups reporting sudden steep increases;
could almighty google be spamming so much that it's running low on power?

David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wednesday, 01 November 2023 16:39 -0000,
> in article <1qjizbc.1d77w5nup213fN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>,
> Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I think Gmail uses a different mechanism: every time a Gmail user
> > marks a junkmail as spam Google is aware of it and moves the spam to
> > the user's junk mailbox. That mechanism is not available to them
> > for News because News users do not feed back real-time spam reports
> > to them.
> >
>
> This is not because the reporting mechanism does not exist, rather
> those who are the noisiest regarding spam from, no by, Google Groups
> are too lazy to go through Google's reporting process. After all,
> taking this action behind the scenes does nothing to boost their quite
> meaningless post count.
>

I did mean real ~Usenet Newsreader~ programs, not Google's ersatz
Google Groups mailing lists. I don't consider their User-Agent: G2/1.0
to be a real ~Usenet~ Newsreader; actually, I killfile on that header.

[what follows is left for context]

> In the past, sufficient jumping^W reporting through Google Groups
> hoops has resulted in the removal of all access to the target groups.
>
> I have not observed a single post in news.admin.net-abuse.email, via
> Google Groups, since December, 2018, as this group is inaccessible
> from GG.
>
> BTW - Blocking posts based on the appearance of gmail.com or
> googlemail.com in the Message-ID is a fools errand, as these do not
> occur. M-IDs and References containg "googlegoups.com" should fit the
> bill.
>
> - --
> David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com>
> "There will be more spam." -- Paul Vixie

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.
My pet rock Gordon just is.

No Google Groups articles seen unless poster is whitelisted.