🚀 go-pugleaf

This idea of putting a "+" in your email address followed by some additional
characters does seem like an interesting way of tracking who picks ups your
email address for SPAM purposes.  But if the people who operate the SPAM robots
(which glean email addresses) know this too, would it not be a simple matter to
test for a "+" in an address and simple delete the trailing information?  Just
curious.

Tim Chambers wrote:

> I have been following the thread "Hot [sic] to get off of junk mail lists"
> (news:37CCA6D7.B176E587@ibm.net) and thought I'd share one of my hobbies
> related to that subject.
>
>
>
> The other part of my hobby just started about a month ago. I've been using
> the e-mail comment feature. You have to make sure your ISP supports this
> (try sending yourself a test message), but all *real* (as opposed to
> *loser*) mailing systems allow a plus sign followed by a comment after your
> e-mail ID and before the @. For instance, let's see if spammers pick up
> tbc+hfwjmas@netbox.com out of this posting.
>
> My SPAM tracing is more selective right now, but only because I'm not
> interested in getting an ever-growing number of duplicate messages. To trap
> e-mail SPAM like a bug on flypaper I simply use a free lifetime e-mail
> address I picked up a while back: tbc@who.net. I never give that address out
> to a human, but I do leave it out like bait (think about what flies eat :-)
> for spammers to take back to their maggot nests. I give lower priority to
> handling any mail sent to that address. It's easy to spot when it comes to
> my Inbox. I indicate my *real* address in the style popularized by Keith
> Dawson does at his "Tasty Bits from the Technology Front" Web site
> (http://www.tbtf.com) -- spelling it out as "tbc at netbox dot com".
>
> <>< Tim http://www.netbox.com/tbc, <tbc at netbox dot com>

--
<<IMPORTANT: SPAM Protection being used: To Reply, keep all letters but remove
all numerals from email address>>