www.libeldefense.com
The content of static pages doesn't change unless you actually code the changes into your HTML file: open the file, edit the content, save the file, and upload it to the server. All search engine spiders can index static Web pages.
A dynamic Web page is a template that displays specific information in response to queries. Most of the page content comes from the database connected to the Web site. Visitors love them since they get quick access to the information they want. These sites are easy for webmasters to update: as product offerings or prices change, just edit your database instead of hundreds of individual Web pages.
Search engine spiders have a much tougher time with dynamic sites. Some get stuck because they can't supply the information the site needs to generate the page. Other spiders deliberately stay away from dynamic pages to avoid getting trapped in the site.
http://libeldefense.studioathome.com/
http://libeldefense.blogspirit.com/
http://libeldefense.blogster.com/jonathan_parr_presents.html
http://libeldefense.livejournal.com/723.html
http://libeldefense.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloglines.com/blog/libeldefense
http://libeldefense.bloghi.com/
http://libeldefense.tripod.com/libeldefense/
http://www.greatestjournal.com/users/libeldefense
http://www.greatestjournal.com/users/libeldefense/362.html
http://www.naymz.com/search/jonathan/parr/1314951
http://www.xanga.com/libeldefense
http://libeldefense.multiply.com/journal/
http://20six.co.uk/libeldefense/
http://libeldefense.blogsome.com/
http://www.freewebs.com/libeldefense/
http://dangerell.googlepages.com/home
http://www.opendiary.com/entrylist.asp?authorcode=D736464
http://libeldefense.bravehost.com/index.html
http://www.my-diary.org/users/296432
http://www.my-diary.org/edit/?action=viewentry&entryid=541256338
http://libeldefense.blog.co.uk/
http://clearblogs.com/libeldefense/78969/Jonathan+Parr+presents+www.libeldef...
http://libeldefense.bloggerteam.com/entry.php?u=libeldefense&e_id=293138
http://www.ebloggy.com/blog.php?username=libeldefense&id=1
http://www.teenblog.org/libeldefense/
http://libeldefense.myweblog.com/2007/10/27/jonathan-parr-presents-wwwlibeld...
http://libeldefense.egoweblog.com/
http://www.bahraichblogs.com/libeldefense/5952/
http://libeldefense.blogbeee.com/
http://portal.blogfusion.com/blogs/libeldefense/
http://noss123network.ning.com/profile/JonathanParr
www.libeldefense.com
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Hi there,
I can't see a relevance of your post to this list, why are you sending this?
Greets
Myriam
On Friday 02 November 2007 10.59:59 Tommy Lee wrote:
www.libeldefense.com
etc.
On 11/2/07, Myriam Rita Schweingruber schweingruber@pharma-traduction.ch wrote:
Hi there,
I can't see a relevance of your post to this list, why are you sending this?
Greets
Probably because "he" is a spam bot.
That'd be my best guess, anyway.
br Carsten
Am Freitag, den 02.11.2007, 11:15 +0100 schrieb Carsten Agger:
Probably because "he" is a spam bot.
Yes, he is. And more than that, he is one of the modern spam bots that is able to subscribe to mailman mailing lists. :-(
If this problem gets worse, we have to think about a solution.
Thanks, Reinhard
On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 11:40 +0100, Reinhard Mueller wrote:
Am Freitag, den 02.11.2007, 11:15 +0100 schrieb Carsten Agger:
Probably because "he" is a spam bot.
Yes, he is. And more than that, he is one of the modern spam bots that is able to subscribe to mailman mailing lists. :-(
If this problem gets worse, we have to think about a solution.
Captcha on subscribe, it's becoming necessary :(
Simo.
simo simo.sorce@xsec.it wrote:
On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 11:40 +0100, Reinhard Mueller wrote:
Yes, he is. And more than that, he is one of the modern spam bots that is able to subscribe to mailman mailing lists. :-(
If this problem gets worse, we have to think about a solution.
Captcha on subscribe, it's becoming necessary :(
Please do *NOT* put a bloody eyetest on this mailing list. That will almost certainly lock out people like me, while allowing in some robots with visual-recognition code. If you want to test spamminess, then eyesight and hearing have little to do with that. If anything, I suspect spammers probably average better on eyesight and hearing tests than the general population these days ;-) I have met one user who read by touch, with solenoids pushing on fingers and I think I've seen braille strip output devices in the past - why should we lock such people out or give them second-class service unnecessarily?
I believe the best test would be to put new members on moderation-hold until they make some sensible posts. (Ultimately, who cares if it's a bot if it's posting relevant stuff? ;-> ) Shouldn't the FSFE be following best practice instead of false sense of security? http://www.w3.org/TR/turingtest#security
Regards,
On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 14:22 +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
simo simo.sorce@xsec.it wrote:
On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 11:40 +0100, Reinhard Mueller wrote:
Yes, he is. And more than that, he is one of the modern spam bots that is able to subscribe to mailman mailing lists. :-(
If this problem gets worse, we have to think about a solution.
Captcha on subscribe, it's becoming necessary :(
Please do *NOT* put a bloody eyetest on this mailing list. That will almost certainly lock out people like me, while allowing in some robots with visual-recognition code. If you want to test spamminess, then eyesight and hearing have little to do with that. If anything, I suspect spammers probably average better on eyesight and hearing tests than the general population these days ;-) I have met one user who read by touch, with solenoids pushing on fingers and I think I've seen braille strip output devices in the past - why should we lock such people out or give them second-class service unnecessarily?
No need to jump on the chair, there are captchas (maybe they have a different name I don;t care too much about the acronym of the day) that just ask you a smart question that requires a brain to answer. Simple arithmetic is one of them but I guess that will not last long. But there are many ways to not use images.
I believe the best test would be to put new members on moderation-hold until they make some sensible posts. (Ultimately, who cares if it's a bot if it's posting relevant stuff? ;-> ) Shouldn't the FSFE be following best practice instead of false sense of security? http://www.w3.org/TR/turingtest#security
It's a catch-up game, this system will give us some more months without requiring stricter moderation of the list (expensive).
Simo.
simo simo.sorce@xsec.it wrote:
On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 14:22 +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
Please do *NOT* put a bloody eyetest on this mailing list. [...]
No need to jump on the chair, there are captchas (maybe they have a different name I don;t care too much about the acronym of the day) that just ask you a smart question that requires a brain to answer. [...]
Sorry - I've seen too many people thoughtlessly go "ok, we need a captcha, so let's find an eyetest" so I go in with both boots hard now.
I don't think much of the question ones either: they often test things like numeracy, memory, spelling or browser privacy settings by accident, which again may not stop people being useful contributors to mailing lists.
I believe the best test would be to put new members on moderation-hold until they make some sensible posts. [...]
It's a catch-up game, this system will give us some more months without requiring stricter moderation of the list (expensive).
As long as you keep on using default-permit, it will always be a catch-up game. Unless FSFE's mailman has been extensively hacked over, we have the resources *today* to put new members on moderation-hold until they make a sensible post. While not as good as Sam's idea, it seems less expensive than installing some captcha.
Regards,
* MJ Ray wrote, On 02/11/07 14:22:
simo simo.sorce@xsec.it wrote:
On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 11:40 +0100, Reinhard Mueller wrote:
Yes, he is. And more than that, he is one of the modern spam bots that is able to subscribe to mailman mailing lists. :-(
If this problem gets worse, we have to think about a solution.
Captcha on subscribe, it's becoming necessary :(
Please do *NOT* put a bloody eyetest on this mailing list. That will almost certainly lock out people like me, while allowing in some robots with visual-recognition code. If you want to test spamminess, then eyesight and hearing have little to do with that. If anything, I suspect spammers probably average better on eyesight and hearing tests than the general population these days ;-) I have met one user who read by touch, with solenoids pushing on fingers and I think I've seen braille strip output devices in the past - why should we lock such people out or give them second-class service unnecessarily?
Not a lot of people think about that; being focussed on how to deny access rather than grant it (which is often never thought about).
I believe the best test would be to put new members on moderation-hold until they make some sensible posts. (Ultimately, who cares if it's a bot if it's posting relevant stuff? ;-> ) Shouldn't the FSFE be following best practice instead of false sense of security? http://www.w3.org/TR/turingtest#security
Makes sense to me.
Many forum-ish things have level of member ship.
If any level member can grant kudos to a lowlier member, such as by approving posts (until they are high enough to be self approved) then we may have a low-effort system.
Sam
* MJ Ray mjr@phonecoop.coop [2007-11-02 14:22:59 +0000]:
I believe the best test would be to put new members on moderation-hold until they make some sensible posts. (Ultimately, who cares if it's a bot if it's posting relevant stuff? ;-> )
Is this possible with default mailman?
Best wishes, Matze
Matthias Kirschner mk@fsfe.org wrote:
- MJ Ray mjr@phonecoop.coop [2007-11-02 14:22:59 +0000]:
I believe the best test would be to put new members on moderation-hold until they make some sensible posts. (Ultimately, who cares if it's a bot if it's posting relevant stuff? ;-> )
Is this possible with default mailman?
Yes. Set Privacy Options...: Sender filters: By default, should new list member postings be moderated? to Yes.
Hope that helps,
From: "simo" simo.sorce@xsec.it
Captcha on subscribe, it's becoming necessary :(
Joy. Captchas as usually realized are evil. They cannot be solved by blind people, and make it difficult for people using text browsers. Sound captchas (much rarer) still can have issues for the deaf and people without sound hardware. Captchas based on some kind of logical puzzle would be fine, but I suspect bots could end up learning the answers to them, since such puzzles are very difficult to generate automatically, and so you end up having to recycle them often. I suggest that something like HashCash or some form of PKI is going to have to be the solution.
--David.
---AV & Spam Filtering by M+Guardian - Risk Free Email (TM)---
On 02-Nov-2007, simo wrote:
Captcha on subscribe, it's becoming necessary :(
Sadly, no CAPTCHA can even theoretically stop spammers, because spammers can harness the power of porn.
URL:http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/11/spammers_using.html
Quoth Ben Finney ben@benfinney.id.au:
On 02-Nov-2007, simo wrote: \ "No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back." | `\ —Turkish proverb | _o__) |
I would like to know your source.
Sebastian