On 1/5/2012 4:28 AM, Charani wrote: > Darrell A. Martin wrote: >> Greetings: >> >> I am not sure about this one. The person has been moderated but not >> banned. The address, mangled, is garden 1 gal (at) gmail.com ... > If the apparent offender has posted normally in the past then I'd be > thinking "hijacked address". If they haven't or haven't posted at all, > then I'd be thinking "spammer". If it looks like spam, smells like spam, > it most likely IS spam and the offender would be getting the order of > the boot. ... Charani: Only one post from this address in 2010-2012, and that was the one that got the sender moderated. The headers appear to be normal, but that doesn't prove the gmail address wasn't hijacked. My best guess is that this person is new to the spam game, and actually thinks that what she? did was OK -- or at least worth a try. That's not an excuse from my point of view, of course, but I did send a brief message explaining what it meant to be moderated and (politely but impersonally) threatening the cyber equivalent of fire and brimstone if a repeat was attempted. My other Vermont lists do not have this address subscribed. Looks like a one off. We'll see. Darrell

Greetings: I am not sure about this one. The person has been moderated but not banned. The address, mangled, is garden 1 gal (at) gmail.com The message, sent to one of my Vermont county lists, extolled the virtues of a site called "Expr esso Bo ok Machi ne". It had absolutely nothing to do with the county -- except that people in Franklin County are rumored to read books from time to time. I feared another incarnation of our favorite book reprint spammers, but this looks different. For what little it may be worth. Darrell

And there are many scientists and students in Russia working on different aspects of DNA. Janet On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 2:31 PM, <JYoung6180@aol.com> wrote: > Yes...and what that means is that this isn't a case of spam being sent with >  the magic words accidentally included in the message and/or subject and a > mass  spammer getting subbed and possibly later spamming ALL lists. IF they > are a  spammer they are a limited spammer with intent to ONLY spam a > specific topic  list...that doesn't happen often, but being prepared based upon the > .ru  address is probably wise. No one is actually accusing the person of > anything  just because their initial posts are being moderated as a precaution. > > Joan > > > In a message dated 12/29/2011 8:31:16 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > DianaGM@dgmweb.net writes: > > On the  other hand, this person appears to have subscribed to only DNA > lists, at  least so far.  That's rather selective for a spammer.  We > shall  see... > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LISTOWNERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Which means it is a tossup as to whether they intend to spam, post a legit message or merely watch and learn. Joan In a message dated 12/29/2011 9:57:59 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, reojan@gmail.com writes: And there are many scientists and students in Russia working on different aspects of DNA. Janet

I typically moderate a new subscriber, at least until they post their first message, so it's not the case that I'm singling this person out. In fact, I wish Mailman had that option, that is, to automatically moderate the first message of any new subscriber. Diana From: JYoung6180@aol.com [mailto:JYoung6180@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 9:32 AM To: DianaGM@dgmweb.net; Listowners-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LO] Possible Spammer Yes...and what that means is that this isn't a case of spam being sent with the magic words accidentally included in the message and/or subject and a mass spammer getting subbed and possibly later spamming ALL lists. IF they are a spammer they are a limited spammer with intent to ONLY spam a specific topic list...that doesn't happen often, but being prepared based upon the .ru address is probably wise. No one is actually accusing the person of anything just because their initial posts are being moderated as a precaution. Joan In a message dated 12/29/2011 8:31:16 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, DianaGM@dgmweb.net writes: On the other hand, this person appears to have subscribed to only DNA lists, at least so far. That's rather selective for a spammer. We shall see...

Yes...and what that means is that this isn't a case of spam being sent with the magic words accidentally included in the message and/or subject and a mass spammer getting subbed and possibly later spamming ALL lists. IF they are a spammer they are a limited spammer with intent to ONLY spam a specific topic list...that doesn't happen often, but being prepared based upon the .ru address is probably wise. No one is actually accusing the person of anything just because their initial posts are being moderated as a precaution. Joan In a message dated 12/29/2011 8:31:16 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, DianaGM@dgmweb.net writes: On the other hand, this person appears to have subscribed to only DNA lists, at least so far. That's rather selective for a spammer. We shall see...

On the other hand, this person appears to have subscribed to only DNA lists, at least so far. That's rather selective for a spammer. We shall see... > From: Charani > Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 2:43 AM > > It /may/ be legit but I'd be very, very suspicious given that it's a > Russian address and a heck of a lot of spam does come out of Russia. > > An attempt to spam the list /may/ be the objective but there's also > the possibility whoever this is is harvesting. > > This is why I have my lists set to approve rather than confirm. I'd > discard it and see if try to subscribe again.

Aaron Hill wrote: > I just wanted to let folks know of a possible spam address. I have > had ccrn@mail.ru subscribe to ALL of my DNA lists for some reason. > > I checked the address on Google, but didn't find anything > conclusive. Just in case, this address is actually a person > interested in genealogy and genetics, I have placed it on > moderation on every list I administer to block any potential spam > messages. > > Does anyone know anything about this address, ccrn@mail.ru? It /may/ be legit but I'd be very, very suspicious given that it's a Russian address and a heck of a lot of spam does come out of Russia. An attempt to spam the list /may/ be the objective but there's also the possibility whoever this is is harvesting. This is why I have my lists set to approve rather than confirm. I'd discard it and see if try to subscribe again. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk http://www.savethegurkhas.co.uk/

I would like to wait to ensure that this isn't a real person. Haven't received any spam messages yet. I will just wait and see. -- Aaron ________________________________ From: Darrell A. Martin <darrellm@sprynet.com> To: Aaron Hill <aaronjhill@yahoo.co.uk> Sent: Wednesday, 28 December 2011, 17:34 Subject: Re: [LO] Possible Spammer Aaron: The domain name, "mail.ru", looks about as legitimate as a proposed law to actually simplify the U.S. Tax Code. I would bet a significant amount of money -- that I could not afford to lose -- that this is a spammer address. Have you tried sending a message to that address from a TEMPORARY ADDRESS of your own? You won't hear back. Moderate, phooey. Ban it. Darrell

I just wanted to let folks know of a possible spam address. I have had ccrn@mail.ru subscribe to ALL of my DNA lists for some reason. I checked the address on Google, but didn't find anything conclusive. Just in case, this address is actually a person interested in genealogy and genetics, I have placed it on moderation on every list I administer to block any potential spam messages. Does anyone know anything about this address, ccrn@mail.ru? -- Aaron   http://aaronjhill.wordpress.com/

On 12/28/2011 8:03 PM, Paul L LeBlanc wrote: > > > > RU is Russia is it not? Affirmative. Darrell

Yes, .ru is Russia, so the top domain is legitimate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.ru but a lot of SPAM comes from .ru addresses. Dina > -----Original Message----- > From: listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:listowners- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul L LeBlanc > Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 9:04 PM > To: aaronjhill@yahoo.co.uk > Cc: listowners@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [LO] Possible Spammer > > > > > RU is Russia is it not? Moderate until you get several good posts > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Aaron Hill > I would like to wait to ensure that this isn't a real person. > Haven't received > ny spam messages yet. I will just wait and see. > -- Aaron > > _______________________________ > From: Darrell A. Martin > > aron: > The domain name, "mail.ru", looks about as legitimate as a proposed > law to actually simplify the U.S. Tax Code. I would bet a > significant amount of money > - that I could not afford to lose -- that this is a spammer address. > Have you tried sending a message to that address from a TEMPORARY > ADDRESS of your own? You won't hear back. > Moderate, phooey. Ban it. > Darrell > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LISTOWNERS- > request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message

This person has just subscribed to two of my DNA-related lists. I immediately put the address on moderation, in case their first message is SPAM. Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:listowners- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Aaron Hill > Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 8:27 PM > To: listowners@rootsweb.com > Subject: [LO] Possible Spammer > > I just wanted to let folks know of a possible spam address. I have > had ccrn@mail.ru subscribe to ALL of my DNA lists for some reason. > > I checked the address on Google, but didn't find anything > conclusive. Just in case, this address is actually a person > interested in genealogy and genetics, I have placed it on moderation > on every list I administer to block any potential spam messages. > > Does anyone know anything about this address, ccrn@mail.ru? > > -- Aaron

RU is Russia is it not? Moderate until you get several good posts -----Original Message----- From: Aaron Hill I would like to wait to ensure that this isn't a real person. Haven't received ny spam messages yet. I will just wait and see. -- Aaron _______________________________ From: Darrell A. Martin aron: The domain name, "mail.ru", looks about as legitimate as a proposed law to actually simplify the U.S. Tax Code. I would bet a significant amount of money - that I could not afford to lose -- that this is a spammer address. Have you tried sending a message to that address from a TEMPORARY ADDRESS of your own? You won't hear back. Moderate, phooey. Ban it. Darrell

Thank you for letting me know, Marilyn. I'm still open to improving it any way I can. Diana > From: Kaesemein@aol.com > Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 9:28 AM > > In a message dated 12/21/2011 9:25:33 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > Kaesemein@aol.com writes: > > Diana, > > I thought the page was great and it explained every > issue that I've dealt with over the last 12 years. > I'll be saving it for future reference. > > Marilyn

In a message dated 12/21/2011 9:25:33 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, Kaesemein@aol.com writes: Diana, I thought the page was great and it explained every issue that I've dealt with over the last 12 years. I'll be saving it for future reference. Marilyn --------------------original message-------------------------- In a message dated 12/20/2011 4:25:46 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, DianaGM@dgmweb.net writes: My page is not a list of rules for admins, it's a list of answers to questions or issues raised by subscribers - some of them many times over the years. I have "boilerplate" for some of these (e.g., the "Plain Text" issue), but I'm finding it a real time-saver to be able to just point to the appropriate FAQ. One reason I'm putting these online is that subscribers don't like finding out after the fact that they weren't supposed to do something. They feel it's unfair not to be forewarned, and I agree with them. We've all learned these things the hard way, by experience, but I don't see that they should have to learn them the hard way, too. I've opened the page up for criticism, so if you have a specific criticism, please do make it. If you object to my making such a page, at all, I recommend we just agree to disagree on that point. Diana

My page is not a list of rules for admins, it's a list of answers to questions or issues raised by subscribers - some of them many times over the years. I have "boilerplate" for some of these (e.g., the "Plain Text" issue), but I'm finding it a real time-saver to be able to just point to the appropriate FAQ. One reason I'm putting these online is that subscribers don't like finding out after the fact that they weren't supposed to do something. They feel it's unfair not to be forewarned, and I agree with them. We've all learned these things the hard way, by experience, but I don't see that they should have to learn them the hard way, too. I've opened the page up for criticism, so if you have a specific criticism, please do make it. If you object to my making such a page, at all, I recommend we just agree to disagree on that point. Diana From: JYoung6180@aol.com [mailto:JYoung6180@aol.com] Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 9:54 AM To: gnphllps@comcast.net; DianaGM@dgmweb.net; Listowners-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LO] mailing list FAQs Mailman has a built-in feature that won't send you the list copy of a list message if your address is also included in the TO or CC addresses. So you won't get two copies. I have not commented thus far in this thread and will otherwise keep my mouth shut on this issue other than to say whether an admin prepared FAQ for admins is good bad or indifferent -- I'm a bit against creating any "rules" or even guidelines for admins that doesn't come from RootsWeb staff. It can lead to misunderstandings as to what ROOTSWEB considers appropriate and what a volunteer admin construes the rules to be. I'd prefer (personally) to see us stick with advice on a "need to know" basis on this list and the Newbie Listowner list where everyone realizes the forums are for admins helping admins and where every admin has a chance to comment. Joan In a message dated 12/18/2011 7:09:48 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, gnphllps@comcast.net writes: Use Reply ALL, instead of Reply. That way you can simply delete the email address you don't want or leave them as I have done which will result in you getting the message twice, usually. Sometimes it doesn't work that way. Gene

Diana Gale Matthiesen wrote: > A thank you to those who've responded to me offlist. I've accepted > pretty much all of your suggestions, and my FAQ list is definitely the > better for it. One odd thing... > > There is one response to me that was onlist - I can see it in the > archive - but I never received a copy, so I can't simply "Reply" to The copy sent to your address, as shown in the original message, bounced :Not accepting mail from this user. Since it did, this one is going only to the list. [snip] > I'm responding to your message, in part, because I'm afraid I don't > understand this phrase: > > "...and could be it's because the first few times the phrase appears > ON SCREEN several places at once." > > Could you please explain? It's been 24 hours and without looking again -- I believe it was in FAQ #1 or #2 -- the phrase "...in fact..." was stairstepped, one above the other on two succeeding lines. This is a problem because it encourages the eye of the reader to skip whatever is between the two instances. Particularly problematic, since it appeared a third time in the NEXT paragraph/FAQ which _could_ lead a reader to skip several sentences. Obviously this could be due to my screen settings or my browser, but surely I'm not unique in that combination, so I was subtly suggesting that two of those "...in fact..." be removed to avoid causing a misunderstanding. Your FAQ of course. Cheryl

Mailman has a built-in feature that won't send you the list copy of a list message if your address is also included in the TO or CC addresses. So you won't get two copies. I have not commented thus far in this thread and will otherwise keep my mouth shut on this issue other than to say whether an admin prepared FAQ for admins is good bad or indifferent -- I'm a bit against creating any "rules" or even guidelines for admins that doesn't come from RootsWeb staff. It can lead to misunderstandings as to what ROOTSWEB considers appropriate and what a volunteer admin construes the rules to be. I'd prefer (personally) to see us stick with advice on a "need to know" basis on this list and the Newbie Listowner list where everyone realizes the forums are for admins helping admins and where every admin has a chance to comment. Joan In a message dated 12/18/2011 7:09:48 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, gnphllps@comcast.net writes: Use Reply ALL, instead of Reply. That way you can simply delete the email address you don't want or leave them as I have done which will result in you getting the message twice, usually. Sometimes it doesn't work that way. Gene

Use Reply ALL, instead of Reply. That way you can simply delete the email address you don't want or leave them as I have done which will result in you getting the message twice, usually. Sometimes it doesn't work that way. Gene At 12:14 AM 12/18/2011, Diana Gale Matthiesen wrote: >Joan, my apologies for responding on the list to what someone pointed >out was a private message. I'm afraid this was an accident that has >to do with the way LISTOWNERS is set up.