FFS

I use Yahoo! mail, makes it easy for me to pick up my emails from the office or wherever I am. The only problem is that over the last couple of weeks its wobbly spam filter has switched from being fairly crap, from previously trapping only about 60% of the spam I get, to currently trapping every bloody email I get forcing me to swim through my spam folder indentifying every bloody email that isn't spam. It's like they switched the sensitivity up to 11 or something insane like that. I can't go on like this, can anyone suggest something I can use that works more effectively. I have a POP3 mailbox which auto-forwards every email I get to my Yahoo! account - which in its current Spam Nazi setting identifies me as a spammer when I replied-all to an email which had my name in the cc list.

My Yahoo! account thinks it's spamming itself. How helpful.

Yes, I realise this is the second post in under 24 hours where I'm asking for help but, frankly, it's about time you started earning your bloody collective keep. With respect.

Digital Realism

As immeasurably powerful in word form as yesterday's image was in visual form...

"What we miss in despair too-fast passed over is that we are ourselves the already spoken. Learning to live with this loneliness and sorrow for the "death of God" is our situation now, our challenge and unsigned invitation. Knowing or not, we are all of us abandoned by this loss. Choosing to love without reason is true power. Love is the voice we have so long longed to hear. It is our own voice." - Christopher Locke.

The Law Of Spam

SPAM email would be much more fun, and effective, if only they'd put some thought and creativity into those subject headings. Just because it doesn't cost you a bean to send 5 bajillion emails out every half hour doesn't mean that you can afford to spend absolutely no time and energy maximising the message, a classic case of valueless exercise for all concerned.

If spammers approached every message with the same degree of attention to detail and quest for perfection as they would if they were writing a simple, short message that would be read one time only, by the whole world simultaneously for a total of 10 seconds, then the quality of writing - and possibly the effectiveness - would be much higher.

Then there's the names they make up, possibly working on the probability of someone by the name of "Brad Silverman" is known to about 100 people on average - I don't know if 100 is the average, I just made it up to support my theory - and if you send 1,000,000 emails from purportedly from Brad, then you'll eventually hit upon someone who (a) knows a guy called Brad Silverman who (b) has failed to reply to a message from Brad Silverman in the last few days and would therefore open up the email. I don't know what the Law of Spam is but there must be a way to work it out. Something like

       am + (em * q)
n =