In article <NLe*eCsIn at news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
timc at chiark.greenend.org.uk (Tim Cutts) writes:
> Also, it increases the volume of NNTP traffic, not decreases it. This
Spambot increases feed volume, but not cleanfeed, which highly
decrease the trafic by simply rejecting articles. But cleanfeed
uses CPU time. It's a choice.
> I have seen recent figures suggesting that 40% of NNTP traffic is
> spam, and a further 40% is the spam-bot generated cancel messages,
> leaving only 20% genuine articles. For this reason a large number of
> spam bot sites have given up.
That's right, one year ago, it was 33/33/33 and now it
is around 40/40/20 on regular servers but 10/10/80 on
cleanfeed using servers.
> Moderation is a solution which does not
> penalise people on mailing lists and those on low bandwidth sites.
Yes, but it takes time to moderate a big newsgroup.
As a moderator of some of the fr.* newsgroups, I know what
François Jeanmougin | groupe de bioinformatique / bioinformatics groupe
tel:(+33) 3 88 65 32 71 | IGBMC BP 163 67404 Illkirch France