Chuck Wassall wrote:
> You are quite right in your exceptions to Bluefrog, and have
> reservations as I do. Let me explain. I live in a remote location that
> can only receive a 28.8K input. While I understand broadband has
> spread widely, most of the world still operates at that speed. When I
> get a hundred spams, some of them over 50K, it takes 4 hours to
> download and my email service has been rendered useless. I think it is
> up to the individual ISP's to filter their services, rather than
> choose to ignore the complaints of their customers as they do now.
I have broadband 11 months of the year and dial-up the remaining
month. When on s-l-o-w dial-up I have found using my ISP's webmail
to clean out spam before I do a POP3 download works quite fine as a
workaound to avoid downloading reams of spam.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do the same thing here. Although I am
always on broadband, one of the 'mail stops' my computer makes each
time I check for mail is with cableone.net. Cable One takes those
items it _percieves_ to be spam (it can be trained by watching your
work the first few days you have it) and it batches them all in a
single file called 'spam and viruses' then sends me a single cover
letter asking me to 'call at the post office' (an http link is provided)
to examine, claim or destroy those items. Naturally I get between 75-100
viruses most days, and about the same number of spams at my cableone.net
account. Little check boxes allow for deliver, destroy, destroy all,
etc and often times just a glance tells me all I care to know about
some of the items, and they can get junked on the spot. Then I can
back out of the post office, return to my Outlook Express and deal
with the _real_ email. It makes it much easier using POP to go to the
server and trash a few hundred of the nasty things then and there
rather then sit and wait while POP delivers them all to me, especially
since some of them are so _huge_ and nasty. PAT]
Tim@Backhome.org