On 13 Oct 1998 17:17:03 GMT,
Dr. Greg Quinn (greg at franklin.burnham-inst.org) wrote:
>Richard P. Grant (see_sig at cmtech.co.delete.uk) wrote:
>: In article <6vtc0v$hfl$1 at franklin.ljcrf.edu>,
>:greg at franklin.burnham-inst.org (Dr. Greg Quinn) wrote:
>:>: : Wouldn't it be a good idea to set up some kind of automoderation
>: : for this (and other bionet) newsgroup, which could simply
>: : consist of a spam filter?
>:>: There is a way to moderate groups so that you have a human moderator who
>: passes or deletes the first message from an address, then lets the 'bot
>: know that a particular address is OK (or not), so all posts from that
>: address will be accepted (or deleted, if need be).
>:>>I think all that's needed is a filter which removes messages that contain
>phrases such as "18 year old nymphos", "naughty" and "make $$$$$$$$$$$ in
>a day". It's no big deal to sift through the spam but it is fairly easily
I'm not sure if that which I describe below is what Greg had in mind, but
there are "spambots" that automatically delete articles. How they work
is much tied into how the NNTP (Usenet) protocol works.
When a spambot detects an article that matches a keyword in a "delete"
list, it sends an cancel-article for the message-id of the offending
article to a newsgroup called "control". When this cancel-article
propagates to other sites (every Usenet site MUST carry the newsgroup
"control"), they will expire or delete the article in question from their
This mechanism is actively used at several sites to control spam posts
to many non-bionet newsgroups. I do not know the legality of running
a spambot for a bionet newsgroup and am hence reluctant to run one
myself, or offer the resources to run one from.
I principle, I concur that a bionet-spambot would be wonderful.
Ashok Aiyar, Ph.D.
McArdle Laboratory for Cancer Research
aiyar at ebv.oncology.wisc.edu