[Theforum] Re: meo

[Daniel J. Cody]

sorry about that email, i was stupid to try to prove a point when it no
longer really matters(to me at least). it's difficult to remove oneself
from 'proving' types of emails after doing it for a prolonged time, as
i'm sure people can understand.. apologies and rock on!

aardvark wrote:
>>From: "Daniel J. Cody" <djc at members.evolt.org>
>>
>>gosh, i hate disupting percentages, but its the math major in me..
>>where are you getting 1%? i just tail'd the logfile and found this:
>>
>>May 21 05:25:01 2002 (26754) thelist post from
>>philparker.dns at btinternet.com held: Post by non-member to a
>>members-only list May 21 05:28:01 2002 (26866) thelist post from
>>philparker.dns at btinternet.com held: Post by non-member to a
>>members-only list May 21 06:14:02 2002 (28447) thelist post from
>>schoolcraftj at sytexinc.com held: Post by non-member to a members-only
>>list
>>
>>and thats within a 1 hour period this afternoon. at least no spam is
>>getting through though.
>
>
> up until last night, when my internet connection pooped the bed, i
> had been adding all addresses from members that posted from alternate
> accounts to the exceptions list... that way nobody would experience
> the issue a second time...
>
> that list is 38 addresses long, but includes a handful of dupes (some
> people have 2 or 3 addresses in there) and the headlines at evolt
> addy...
>
> from a 2900 person list, that's 1.3% (38).. .removing dupes and the
> like, and adding the two addresses you cite, that drops it to 1.1%
> (34)... if i further remove the addys that subbed themselves, well, i
> know of three so far, but i'll have to check the rest, that's (31)
> 1.06%...  a few days ago, it was sub-1%...
>
> if i just went with the two addys in the logfile you provide, of
> course, we'd have a significantly lower number... if you want, i can
> average the number of held posts from unsubbed addys per day...
>
> if you'd like to see all held post notifications since the 6th, i can
> provide a list of that, as well... i can also provide a list of all
> posts held for "suspicious headers" that contain completely normal
> headers...
>
> why, what percentages did you get?
>
> and if you think i'm reading the data wrong, lemme know, or point me
> to some documentation... i'm sure it could be useful...