In article <uq9eo5$8ng0$1@dont-email.me>, immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
>On 7/02/24 22:36, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> In article <aaa0cc6b4cd248a5e6e208902d2d874d@dizum.com>, D <J@M> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 14:07:09 +0100, Andrew <Doug@hyperspace.vogon.gov> wrote:
>>>> Spam Report wrote:
>>>>> group comp.terminals on paganini is spam flooded
>>>>
>>>> as is comp.lang.cobol, 36 so far today.
>>>
>>> there's no going back . . . once google falls off the usenet radar, other
>>> notoriously-spammy servers will stick out like a sore thumb, particularly
>>> those that appear to function as troll farm storefronts . . . if almighty
>>> google is saving face, those less invincible may not afford such luxuries
>>
>> Yes, but dumping traffic from them will be much less problematic than a
>> UDP on google.
>
>If, as is often cited, approximately 0 useful traffic comes from Google,
>then what is problematic about a UDP on it?

It's not 0. It's very low, but it's not 0. It's large enough in some
groups that there were worries about it. In technical groups it is
pretty much 0, though. But at this point it is academic.
--scott

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

Ivo Gandolfo <usenet@bofh.team> wrote:

> My server it's not the source of this spam, and I can't be able to
> monitor all group's. But we can ask one of the NoCem bot's owner Ray or
> Retro Guy to do a mass-nocem notice to delete them (or with cancels).

I issued nocems from news.chmurka.net for these spams (and added senders
to filters, so they're automatically nocem-ed). The group is clean from it
on my side now.

Ivo Gandolfo wrote:
> On 07/02/2024 23:16, Retro Guy wrote:
>>
>> I checked the Message-IDs of several spam on your server (paganini) and
>> they are already listed in NoCeM messages.
>>
>> Is there maybe an issue applying the NoCeMs recently?
>
> Seem's strange, I have added all bot's on my nocem rig. Tomorrow I will
> check the log's.
>
>
> Sincerely
>

I don't use Retro Guy's server, but do use Eternal September. Ray on ES
deletes the garbage on comp.lang.cobol pretty much as fast as it
arrives. As far as I can see, no false positives, but no "false
negatives" either. Of course I don't know if he is detecting the crap
or if he is applying NoCeMs from elsewhere, whatever he's doing it is
effective.
No-one is suggesting that this garbage is entered via Paganini (it is
100% Google Groups), it is more that the pest control applied by other
sites is not making it to Paganini.