What am I doing wrong???

Quoted message said:

Did your valve indeed separate from the tube or was there some other

failure

Quoted message said:

mode?

Wish I could post a picture. I'll try to describe... Where the valve meets the tube, there is a
semi-circle cut in the rubber. The valve itself is still attached to the tube on the other parts.
It's just this semi-circle that appears to have been cut from the tube.

RE/

Quoted message said:

I'd like to believe you - do you have any evidence for this claim? I get too much junk to accept
this without evidence.

(FWIW, I think this fuss over anonymity is really silly, in both directions.)

Two points:

1) There's a type of spam called "Dictionary Attack". The spammer gets a domain name (e.g.
Erols.com) and just generates a half-million or so messages to "[email hidden]", "[email hidden]",
"[email hidden]" "[email hidden]" and so-forth; driving the process with a "Dictionary" of
thousands upon thousands of first names.

It looks to me like this technique has grown a *lot* over the past several months. I've got a vanity
domain name for which everything goes into my EarthLink mailbox and my spam has increased from less
than a hundred per day to around 500 per day and seems to be growing still.

2) In light of the above, I guard my "real" address like the gold in Fort Knox. The only thing that
makes it even possible for me to use eMail with 500 spams a day coming in is the ability to
filter out stuff that's not to my "real" address. Even so, my "real" address unfortunately has a
"real" name in it so I'm still seeing several spams per day from the dictionary attacks.
-----------------------
PeteCresswell

Pete Cresswell said:

Quoted message said:

I'd like to believe you - do you have any evidence for this claim? I get too much junk to accept
this without evidence.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(FWIW, I think this fuss over anonymity is really silly, in both directions.)

Quoted message said:

Two points:

Quoted message said:

1) There's a type of spam called "Dictionary Attack". The spammer gets a domain name (e.g.
Erols.com) and just generates a half-million or so messages to "[email hidden]",
"[email hidden]", "[email hidden]" "[email hidden]" and so-forth; driving the process with
a "Dictionary" of thousands upon thousands of first names.

Quoted message said:

It looks to me like this technique has grown a *lot* over the past several months. I've got a
vanity domain name for which everything goes into my EarthLink mailbox and my spam has increased
from less than a hundred per day to around 500 per day and seems to be growing still.

Quoted message said:

2) In light of the above, I guard my "real" address like the gold in Fort Knox. The only thing
that makes it even possible for me to use eMail with 500 spams a day coming in is the ability
to filter out stuff that's not to my "real" address. Even so, my "real" address unfortunately
has a "real" name in it so I'm still seeing several spams per day from the dictionary attacks.

Maybe if you just signed your stuff with your real name and address as I do, you wouldn't have
such a problem. My 'spam assassin' catches all of them and they amount to about a dozen per day. I
have been posting my name and address for many years now and it hasn't been as the spamophobics
say it is.

Jobst Brandt [email hidden] Palo Alto CA

<[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Pete Cresswell said:

Quoted message said:

I'd like to believe you - do you have any evidence for

this claim?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I get too much junk to accept this without evidence.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(FWIW, I think this fuss over anonymity is really

silly, in both

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

directions.)

Quoted message said:

Two points:

Quoted message said:

1) There's a type of spam called "Dictionary Attack".

The spammer

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

gets a domain name (e.g. Erols.com) and just generates a half-million or so messages to
"[email hidden]",

"[email hidden]",

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"[email hidden]" "[email hidden]" and so-forth;

driving the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

process with a "Dictionary" of thousands upon thousands

of first

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

names.

Quoted message said:

It looks to me like this technique has grown a *lot*

over the past

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

several months. I've got a vanity domain name for which

everything

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

goes into my EarthLink mailbox and my spam has increased

from less

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

than a hundred per day to around 500 per day and seems

to be growing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

still.

Quoted message said:

2) In light of the above, I guard my "real" address like

the gold in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Fort Knox. The only thing that makes it even possible

for me to use

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

eMail with 500 spams a day coming in is the ability to

filter out

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

stuff that's not to my "real" address. Even so, my

"real" address

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

unfortunately has a "real" name in it so I'm still

seeing several

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

spams per day from the dictionary attacks.

Maybe if you just signed your stuff with your real name

and address as

Quoted message said:

I do, you wouldn't have such a problem. My 'spam

assassin' catches

Quoted message said:

all of them and they amount to about a dozen per day. I

have been

Quoted message said:

posting my name and address for many years now and it

hasn't been as

Quoted message said:

the spamophobics say it is.

Jobst Brandt [email hidden] Palo Alto CA

<[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Pete Cresswell said:

Quoted message said:

I'd like to believe you - do you have any evidence for

this claim?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I get too much junk to accept this without evidence.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(FWIW, I think this fuss over anonymity is really

silly, in both

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

directions.)

Quoted message said:

Two points:

Quoted message said:

1) There's a type of spam called "Dictionary Attack".

The spammer

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

gets a domain name (e.g. Erols.com) and just generates a half-million or so messages to
"[email hidden]",

"[email hidden]",

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"[email hidden]" "[email hidden]" and so-forth;

driving the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

process with a "Dictionary" of thousands upon thousands

of first

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

names.

Quoted message said:

It looks to me like this technique has grown a *lot*

over the past

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

several months. I've got a vanity domain name for which

everything

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

goes into my EarthLink mailbox and my spam has increased

from less

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

than a hundred per day to around 500 per day and seems

to be growing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

still.

Quoted message said:

2) In light of the above, I guard my "real" address like

the gold in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Fort Knox. The only thing that makes it even possible

for me to use

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

eMail with 500 spams a day coming in is the ability to

filter out

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

stuff that's not to my "real" address. Even so, my

"real" address

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

unfortunately has a "real" name in it so I'm still

seeing several

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

spams per day from the dictionary attacks.

Maybe if you just signed your stuff with your real name

and address as

Quoted message said:

I do, you wouldn't have such a problem. My 'spam

assassin' catches

Quoted message said:

all of them and they amount to about a dozen per day. I

have been

Quoted message said:

posting my name and address for many years now and it

hasn't been as

Quoted message said:

the spamophobics say it is.

Spam is easily mangeable. The trouble is most users, and even system administrators, don't bother to
try. And no wonder since common mail programs, particularly Microsoft's, completely lack good,
"smart" filtering tools.

I've been posting on these groups with the same address for probably 10 years. My address appears on
several mailing lists and web pages too. Deltanet is long dead and their mail server is unmaintained
-- no SpamAssassin, Razor, etc. Therefore I get tons of spam -- hundreds of messages a day,
sometimes over 1000.

PopFile is an excellent spam filtering program that anyone can use on their personal computer. Mine
runs at over 99% accuracy. It's easy to use, runs on virtually any platform, and it's free. Get it:

popfile.sourceforge.netpopfile.sourceforge.netOpen ↗

About anonymity -- if you're so brilliant, why not take the credit? Methinks those that hide are
practitioners of the inverse...

Matt O.

RE/

Quoted message said:

My 'spam assassin' catches all of them and they amount to about a dozen per day. I have been
posting my name and address for many years now and it hasn't been as the spamophobics say it is.

My guess is that you've got something else going for you that you don't know about. Maybe some
spam-filtering upstream.

In the beginning, I foolishly posted return addresses in internet posts using the name of the
newsgroup as the person's name - thinking it would be amusing to see where the spame comes from and
never imagining the deluge that would follow.

I stopped that practice almost a year ago and I'm still getting 20-30 spams a day (down from around
a hundred...) to those newsgroup names. In fact before, virtually all the spam I got was to news
group names. Now it's mostly to random names at my domain name.

-----------------------
PeteCresswell

RE/

Quoted message said:

Therefore I get tons of spam -- hundreds of messages a day, sometimes over 1000.

PopFile is an excellent spam filtering program that anyone can use on their personal computer. Mine
runs at over 99% accuracy. It's easy to use, runs on virtually any platform, and it's free. Get it:

But how long does it take to check your mail?

I use MailWasher - and it takes care of 90+% of the spam...but if a client calls me on the phone and
says "Yo, Pete we're having this or that problem and I'm gonna send you a copy of the error log
right now...", his mail doesn't just pop into my inbox....it's more like 15-20 minutes to fire up
MailWasher, wait until it downloads a couple hundred spams along with a couple of legit emails, and
the wait some more while it does it's thing with deleting/blacklisting the spams.

Manageble? Yes - but so is crawling to the corner store on one's hands and knees instead of
riding a bike...
-----------------------
PeteCresswell

Jobst Brandt said:

It's not OK. Just be civil and admit who you are. Spammers do not read signature lines so that
excuse for anonymity doesn't hold.

I don't see the big deal about posting anonymously to this (or any other) newsgroup. Let's say the
guy used a name other than "nospam" in the header or signature--how would you know he didn't just
make the name up out of thin air?

How do you know that Robin Burns is a real name or just a figment of my imagination, and how do I
know that Jobst Brandt is your real name? Who really cares?

"(Pete Cresswell)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

RE/

Quoted message said:

Therefore I get tons of spam -- hundreds of messages a

day,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

sometimes over 1000.

PopFile is an excellent spam filtering program that

anyone

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

can use on their personal computer. Mine runs at over

99%

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

accuracy. It's easy to use, runs on virtually any

platform,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

and it's free. Get it:

But how long does it take to check your mail?

A few seconds.

Quoted message said:

I use MailWasher - and it takes care of 90+% of the

spam...but if a client calls

Quoted message said:

me on the phone and says "Yo, Pete we're having this or

that problem and I'm

Quoted message said:

gonna send you a copy of the error log right now...", his

mail doesn't just pop

Quoted message said:

into my inbox....it's more like 15-20 minutes to fire up

MailWasher, wait until

Quoted message said:

it downloads a couple hundred spams along with a couple of

legit emails, and the

Quoted message said:

wait some more while it does it's thing with

deleting/blacklisting the spams.

PopFile runs in the background, and filters mail as it comes
in. It's hardly slower than Outlook Express all by itself (you can use it with any mail program).
If you don't want to run it in the background, it takes about a second to fire up.

You have to train PopFile's filters, which takes only a minute or so a day. After a couple of
months, you won't have to do this anymore. Like I said, it works for me with hundreds to thousands
of messages a day, with over 99% accuracy. And the error are always a spam or two that gets through,
not real mail getting lost.

Quoted message said:

Manageble? Yes - but so is crawling to the corner store on

one's hands and knees

Quoted message said:

instead of riding a bike...

Oh, come on, it's really not that bad. I can imagine there are some awfully useless products out
there, but there are some good ones too.

Matt O.

RE/

Quoted message said:

Oh, come on, it's really not that bad. I can imagine there are some awfully useless products out
there, but there are some good ones too.

I was commenting on the impact of spam on my work life, not on the product used to help control it.

PopFile sounds pretty good - if you're continually connected - but for dialup it would seem to be
pretty much the same as MailWasher: wait for it to iterate through all the spam before seeing the
"real" mail.
-----------------------
PeteCresswell

"(Pete Cresswell)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

PopFile sounds pretty good - if you're continually

connected - but for dialup it

Quoted message said:

would seem to be pretty much the same as MailWasher: wait

for it to iterate

Quoted message said:

through all the spam before seeing the "real" mail.

There's no waiting. It doesn't iterate through folders full of mail. It filters and sorts the mail
as it comes in, putting it into the correct folders (ones for real mail, one for spam). The few
milliseconds it takes to sort/route each message is insignificant. You won't notice.

Matt O.

Matt O'Toole said:

"(Pete Cresswell)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

PopFile sounds pretty good - if you're continually

connected - but for dialup it

Quoted message said:

would seem to be pretty much the same as MailWasher: wait

for it to iterate

Quoted message said:

through all the spam before seeing the "real" mail.

There's no waiting. It doesn't iterate through folders full of mail. It filters and sorts the mail
as it comes in, putting it into the correct folders (ones for real mail, one for spam). The few
milliseconds it takes to sort/route each message is insignificant. You won't notice.

The real problem is that you still need to download the spam, over dialup. *This* takes time.
However, there's no solution to that, other than a spamkiller product at your ISPs server.

Jasper

Phil Brown said:

I can verify that Jobst Brandt is in fact his real name.

As I said, who really cares?

(As if forging Usenet posts were really that hard anyway--how could you be *really* sure it was
Jobst and not someone forging the headers on a post and imitating Jobst's curmudgeonly style? ;-)

"Matt O'Toole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

PopFile is an excellent spam filtering program that anyone can use on their personal computer.
Mine runs at over 99% accuracy. It's easy to use, runs on virtually any platform, and it's
free. Get it:

popfile.sourceforge.netpopfile.sourceforge.netOpen ↗

Thankyou thankyou thankyou. This has gotta be the best tip I've read on RBT in years. After getting
thoroughly fed up of deleting upwards of 100 spam messages each day, I recently downloaded
SpamKiller, which deletes most spam, but presents you with ads from symantec every couple of days
instead. Also, you've got to sit and wait while the stoopid program downloads all your email from
the server when you start your PC before you can open your email program, which then downloads all
the actual email _again_.

PopFile, on the other hand, just works. It downloads mail as your email program requests it, and
then just once, and operates totally transparently. No pop-up ads, no [censored].

Thanks a bundle for that.

Regards,

Suzy

--
---
Suzy Jackson [email hidden] suzyj.netsuzyj.netOpen ↗

Suzy Jackson said:

"Matt O'Toole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

PopFile is an excellent spam filtering program that anyone can use on their personal computer.
Mine runs at over 99% accuracy. It's easy to use, runs on virtually any platform, and it's
free. Get it:

popfile.sourceforge.netpopfile.sourceforge.netOpen ↗

Thankyou thankyou thankyou. This has gotta be the best tip I've read on RBT in years. After
getting thoroughly fed up of deleting upwards of 100 spam messages each day, I recently downloaded
SpamKiller, which deletes most spam, but presents you with ads from symantec every couple of days
instead. Also, you've got to sit and wait while the stoopid program downloads all your email from
the server when you start your PC before you can open your email program, which then downloads all
the actual email _again_.

PopFile, on the other hand, just works. It downloads mail as your email program requests it, and
then just once, and operates totally transparently. No pop-up ads, no [censored].

I haven't tried that, doesn't run on Mac unless you're a Perl hacker, which I ain't.

However, for the past few weeks I've been running Eudora 6.0 b18 (beta) and have been quite well
pleased with it.

Due to my high Web visibility, I typically get about 1000 spam emails daily, but Eudora 6 is doing a
great job of keeping them out of my way.

Sheldon "Eudoraphile" Brown +-------------------------------------------+
| If Stupidity got us into this mess, | then why can't it get us out? | -- Will Rogers |
+-------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone
617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 harriscyclery.comharriscyclery.comOpen ↗ Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
captainbike.comcaptainbike.comOpen ↗ sheldonbrown.comsheldonbrown.comOpen ↗

Mark Janeba said:

Quoted message said:

Spammers do not read signature lines so that excuse for anonymity doesn't hold.

I'd like to believe you - do you have any evidence for this claim?

It is enormously faster to harvest addresses from a subset of the headers of news articles than from
the remaining headers or the article bodies.

This subset does not include Reply-To:.

Hence if you must engage in the selfish practice of address mangling, post with a valid
Reply-To: line.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> Kill the tomato!

Update to my problem: Thanks to all the GREAT advice from this group and its users, I resolved
my problem.
1) I made sure to deburr the hole, took a file and gently deburred the hole and made sure it was
nice and smooth all the way around.
2) I got some more rim tape and made sure it was covering the hole.
3) I got a floor pump and went that route instead of using my mini-pump.

Put everything together and everything is A-OK now! Went 35 miles this weekend and not a
single problem!

Thanks for everything all!

RE/

Quoted message said:

the ... practice of address mangling

?
-----------------------
PeteCresswell