Comments on: Skype spam http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/ Random Musings. Imaginary readers. Mon, 30 Aug 2010 13:52:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: nekram http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/comment-page-1/#comment-188584 nekram Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:34:33 +0000 http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/#comment-188584 (Y) (Y)

]]> By: nekram http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/comment-page-1/#comment-188583 nekram Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:33:57 +0000 http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/#comment-188583 Bah at spam. Does it ever end? Whats next? Bah at spam. Does it ever end? Whats next?

]]> By: Peter http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/comment-page-1/#comment-18575 Peter Tue, 09 Oct 2007 19:37:08 +0000 http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/#comment-18575 The answer is to disallow links or email addresses in messages that come from people that aren't in your contact list. The answer is to disallow links or email addresses in messages that come from people that aren’t in your contact list.

]]> By: Rational Human http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/comment-page-1/#comment-13269 Rational Human Wed, 08 Aug 2007 21:10:56 +0000 http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/#comment-13269 SPAM is an abuse of a free resource. Make it free and people WILL abuse it. The only rational solution I've heard to-date? re-imbursable micro-charges for bandwidth. Here's how it works- you send out an e-mail. You get charged a few cents. If the recipient doesn't mark it as SPAM, you get your money back (i.e. this doesn't make the net any costlier, doesn't regulate it, doesn't disenfranchise anyone) But for a SPAM-mer, since the response rate is SPAM is an abuse of a free resource. Make it free and people WILL abuse it. The only rational solution I’ve heard to-date? re-imbursable micro-charges for bandwidth.
Here’s how it works- you send out an e-mail. You get charged a few cents. If the recipient doesn’t mark it as SPAM, you get your money back (i.e. this doesn’t make the net any costlier, doesn’t regulate it, doesn’t disenfranchise anyone)

But for a SPAM-mer, since the response rate is

]]> By: mumbaigirl http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/comment-page-1/#comment-13096 mumbaigirl Mon, 06 Aug 2007 14:16:53 +0000 http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/#comment-13096 I get these damn things in my work email all the time. I get these damn things in my work email all the time.

]]> By: Perspective Inc http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/comment-page-1/#comment-12801 Perspective Inc Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:46:04 +0000 http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/#comment-12801 Bah at spam. Does it ever end? Whats next? Bah at spam. Does it ever end? Whats next?

]]> By: Practically Quixotic... http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/comment-page-1/#comment-48597 Practically Quixotic... Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/#comment-48597 <!--%kramer-pre%-->Yet another 'spam' message via Skype today. Not the first one this week, either. So i'm googling for info on 'Skype Spammers' and the below blog comes to my attention:http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/Well suffice to say it doesn't seem like much has changed. So I endorse the below.. 'report this user' would've been a simple enough feature to add. Whoopsie. Other Google hits basically imply that methods for dealing with spammers remain a 'work in<!--%kramer-post%--> Yet another ‘spam’ message via Skype today. Not the first one this week, either. So i’m googling for info on ‘Skype Spammers’ and the below blog comes to my attention:http://shripriya.com/blog/2007/07/26/skype-spam/Well suffice to say it doesn’t seem like much has changed. So I endorse the below.. ‘report this user’ would’ve been a simple enough feature to add. Whoopsie. Other Google hits basically imply that methods for dealing with spammers remain a ‘work in

]]>