Almost all spammer we were are getting to our network these days have more than three periods in their email address like firstname.lastname@example.org.
Do you agree that if an email address has more than three periods then it should automatically be blocked?
Do you have the setting where they have to active the link sent to their email?
Yes, I have
Totally second this. Actually, I'd go so far as to include addresses with even 1 period. Great as an opt-in spam setting. I personally have yet to correspond with anyone that has a period in their e-mail that is not a spammer. The technique, as well the modification of addresses with numbers, is a direct result of these people getting blacklisted on spam registries, and is easy to automate. I say, for the spam detriment such addresses tend to cause, send them all into the black hole of categorical rejection!
I personally have yet to correspond with anyone that has a period in their e-mail that is not a spammer.
It is clear that we have not corresponded by email. Thanks for categorically rejecting me.
Lol! Right on- that position certainly deserves to be represented in this discussion then!
include addresses with even 1 period not a good idea
lots of company emails have 1 eg email@example.com
2 or more should ring alarm bells
My son has two periods in his email address. I guess he's rejected, too.
Mine has on period in it too. I've also seen two periods especially for our spanish speaking members. Three on the other hand seems more likely.
Three and up is suspicious.
Ha ha, good points then!
I see why 3 was originally selected now. Just my narrow view of a big big online world. Thanks for correcting me.
I should have done some online research keywording FREQUENT & PERIODS. At least you guys can't take away my experience playing football... and being captain of the punteam.
After this war on dots, the spammers will just switch to underscores: firstname.lastname@example.org looks perfectly legit, or?
Formal rules like 'three dots in your address and you are out' do not help much here. Let Ning train up their Bayesian spam filter. (Which was pretty crappy in the past due to a large number of false positives. That seem to have been improved big time.) Properly trained, the filter should be able to distinguish between spammers and legitimate applicants. (The odd exception not withstanding.)
if you had to have a retina scan these clever peeps would still find a way,
CALIFORNIAN MAN CHARGED WITH IMPERSONATING AN EYE.......lol....