<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: That&#x27;s not a spam protection model in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r15418154</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 06:32:19 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 06:32:19 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: That&#x27;s not a spam protection model</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15418154</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/772729"><b>Nerdtalker</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><SMALL>said by Gmail User :</SMALL><br><br>This is why I think that Gmail is one of the best e-mail services out there. Hopefully Google won't follow AOL and Yahoo's lead.<br> </DIV>Same. <br><br>The day when email becomes fee-based (mandated) will be the day that another protocol for message exchange is necessitated.<br><SMALL>--<br>"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn<BR><BR>I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com<BR><B>Spam: 12900+</B> messages currently using 406 MB.</SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15418154</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 20:48:36 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: That&#x27;s not a spam protection model</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15417527</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : This is why I think that Gmail is one of the best e-mail services out there. Hopefully Google won't follow AOL and Yahoo's lead.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15417527</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 19:55:04 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: That&#x27;s not a spam protection model</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15417600</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/996768"><b>jbob</b></A> : Supposedly this paid SPAM will be allowed to bypass the filters.  This of course will put pressure on someone, either Yahoo or the sender, to abide by the CAN-SPAM act.  Perhaps the paid SPAM will have a true Opt Out link that works.  If not then Yahoo or AOL will be putting the nails on their own coffins.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15417600</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 19:44:32 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: That&#x27;s not a spam protection model</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15417490</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/631859"><b>morph3ous</b></A> : This will actually help the spammers. Since more legitimate commercial email will go to your junk folder, you will have to examine those emails more critically.<br><SMALL>--<br><A HREF="http://morph3ous.net">My Blog</A></SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15417490</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 19:32:23 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>That&#x27;s not a spam protection model</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15417148</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/539077"><b>sbrook</b></A> : It's a CanSpam model!<br><br>Although, how many true business mails does an AOL or Yahoo member receive per year.  Precious few.  Seems to me this is going to cost more to pay goodmail than they'll get in revenue!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15417148</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 18:53:44 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
