in reply to OT: Spam protection

Wow. What a tough problem. It's also one that I'll have to try to deal with in a few years so I especially appreciate you paving the way. ;-)

I think the use of SpamAssassin and Mozilla is a good starting point.

I have the same reservations about automated replies that BrowserUk voiced. But if you do go that route, FIGlet might not be the best choice. A figlet "encoded" string might be almost decipherable to someone who views it in something other than a fixed width font.

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: OT: Spam protection
by t0mas (Priest) on Jun 10, 2003 at 09:35 UTC
    A figlet "encoded" string might be almost decipherable to someone who views it in something other than a fixed width font.

    Ah, somthing else I didn't think about! I only use fixed font plain text viewing myself...

    I thought of FIGlets since they are easy to create, easy to read by the human eye, but require work to decode by a computer, and I don't think a mass-mailer would bother to do that.

    Thanks for your input.

    /brother t0mas