Catherine@whitequark·Oct 3, 2016Replying to @muninit seems moderately likely that this is misbehaving antispam (e.g. what happened to @allgebrah). also likely that they hide...21
Catherine@whitequark·Oct 3, 2016Replying to @whitequark and @muninpolitically motivated bans under the guise of antispam. or that their antispam filter learned itself to be p. motivated.12
Catherine@whitequark·Oct 3, 2016Replying to @whitequark and @muninreally, shadowbanning as an antispam measure is indefensible; spamassassin is almost entirely transparent and it works excellent13
'(·)@allgebrah·Oct 3, 2016Replying to @whitequark and @muninit really depends on the adversary - when spammers evolve instead of moving on, you'll want to keep your methods secret2
Catherine@whitequark·Oct 3, 2016Replying to @allgebrah and @muninspammers evolve and yet spamassassin has survived1
'(·)@allgebrah·Oct 3, 2016Replying to @whitequark and @muninnow I can't cite any case studies but from my own antispam experience and from watching gmail and other large providers1
'(·)@allgebrahReplying to @allgebrah @whitequark and @muninI very much doubt spamassassin would help them10:51 PM · Oct 3, 2016·Twitter Web Client
Catherine@whitequark·Oct 3, 2016Replying to @allgebrah and @muninI run nothing except spamassassin in a default config and I leave my email everywhere. I get lots of spam... all filtered1
Catherine@whitequark·Oct 3, 2016Replying to @whitequark @allgebrah and @muninNow you may claim this is atypical but I would like to hear why, for one2