News.individual.NET users?

[Shaun aRe]

Hey folks - dunno if you've heard yet, but the server will no longer be a
free one, from April 1st - not a fools joke.

10 EURO per year. I still think it's worth it for their kind of service
though.







Shaun aRe

 

[Tim]

In article <[email protected]>, Shaun aRe wrote:
> Hey folks - dunno if you've heard yet, but the server will no longer be a
> free one, from April 1st - not a fools joke.
>
> 10 EURO per year. I still think it's worth it for their kind of service
> though.
>
>
>
Same thoughts here; for ~6ish quid a year it's worth it for the
service. Just need to make sure I get round to stumping up before I get
cut off at the knee, so to speak.
--
Tim.

 

[Shaun aRe]

"Tim" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Shaun aRe wrote:
> > Hey folks - dunno if you've heard yet, but the server will no longer be
a
> > free one, from April 1st - not a fools joke.
> >
> > 10 EURO per year. I still think it's worth it for their kind of service
> > though.
> >
> >
> >
> Same thoughts here; for ~6ish quid a year it's worth it for the
> service.

Yeah, funny how in another group I use, all I read was *****ing and requests
for knowledge of any other free server. I mean, I haven't heard of a paid
for one that's been more reliable than NID anyway.

> Just need to make sure I get round to stumping up before I get
> cut off at the knee, so to speak.

Same here.


Shaun aRe

 

[Peter J Cresswell]

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 09:52:58 -0000, "Shaun aRe"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>eah, funny how in another group I use, all I read was *****ing and requests
>for knowledge of any other free server. I mean, I haven't heard of a paid
>for one that's been more reliable than NID anyway.

I just signed up for broadband and have only been using Indiv for a
short time....was resigned to signing up for GigaNews once my old ISP
went away.

Is individual that reliable? If so, maybe I'll just stick with it...

 

[Peter J Cresswell]

On a tangental note, can anybody who uses Agent tell me what I'm doing
wrong that "Re:" gets concatted onto my subject headers?

Seems to fragment the threads...

 

[Ne>]

"Shaun aRe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hey folks - dunno if you've heard yet, but the server will no longer be a
> free one, from April 1st - not a fools joke.
>
> 10 EURO per year. I still think it's worth it for their kind of service
> though.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Shaun aRe
>
>
>
Ta for the inf.

 

[taywood]

"Peter J Cresswell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 09:52:58 -0000, "Shaun aRe"
>
> Is individual that reliable? If so, maybe I'll just stick with it...

You wont hear me saying YES

That'd be like giving it the kiss of death.
Like the sports commentator who shouts out
'he's going to win'
errr
oops !!

 

[Slacker]

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 12:38:27 -0500, Peter J Cresswell <[email protected]> wrote:

> Is individual that reliable? If so, maybe I'll just stick with it...


Yes, it is.
--
Slacker

 

[Shaun aRe]

"Peter J Cresswell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 09:52:58 -0000, "Shaun aRe"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >eah, funny how in another group I use, all I read was *****ing and
requests
> >for knowledge of any other free server. I mean, I haven't heard of a paid
> >for one that's been more reliable than NID anyway.
>
> I just signed up for broadband and have only been using Indiv for a
> short time....was resigned to signing up for GigaNews once my old ISP
> went away.
>
> Is individual that reliable? If so, maybe I'll just stick with it...

IME they have been stellar, all round stellar.



Shaun aRe - German efficiency dontchaknow.


Shaun aRe

 

[(Pete Cresswell)]

Per Shaun aRe:
>> Is individual that reliable? If so, maybe I'll just stick with it...
>
>IME they have been stellar, all round stellar.

Just got finished reading their FAQ page.

It made a *really* good impression.... I think they'll get my money ASAP...I
just hope they make enough to stay with it.
--
PeteCresswell

 

[(Pete Cresswell)]

Per (Pete Cresswell):
>It made a *really* good impression..

Except for register.php|Rules For Usage|Sender Address, which seemed kind of
strange to me.

It requires all users include a valid "From" address on their posts.

I can deal with that because I have a sophisticated-enough mail service that I
can supply an address to which messages will be put in a special place...and my
only hassle is deleting the hundreds of spams before that special place
overloads my mail allotment on the server.

But I think somebody with just one address is going to have problems. Maybe
not today or tomorrow, but over time as bots harvest their address from the NG
posts.

I used to post legit addresses in NGs and now my domain gets 7,000-8,000 spams
per day....granted most of them are dictionary attacks, but hundreds of them are
to legitimate addresses I put in NG posts before I caught on.
--
PeteCresswell

 

[tcmedara]

(Pete Cresswell) wrote:
> Per (Pete Cresswell):
>> It made a *really* good impression..
>
> Except for register.php|Rules For Usage|Sender Address, which seemed
> kind of strange to me.
>
> It requires all users include a valid "From" address on their posts.
>
> I can deal with that because I have a sophisticated-enough mail
> service that I can supply an address to which messages will be put in
> a special place...and my only hassle is deleting the hundreds of
> spams before that special place overloads my mail allotment on the
> server.
>
> But I think somebody with just one address is going to have problems.
> Maybe not today or tomorrow, but over time as bots harvest their
> address from the NG posts.
>
> I used to post legit addresses in NGs and now my domain gets
> 7,000-8,000 spams per day....granted most of them are dictionary
> attacks, but hundreds of them are to legitimate addresses I put in NG
> posts before I caught on.

Can't you just create a throw away account on hotmail or Yahoo and just
write it off?

Tom

 

[MattB]

tcmedara wrote:
> (Pete Cresswell) wrote:
>
>>Per (Pete Cresswell):
>>
>>>It made a *really* good impression..
>>
>>Except for register.php|Rules For Usage|Sender Address, which seemed
>>kind of strange to me.
>>
>>It requires all users include a valid "From" address on their posts.
>>
>>I can deal with that because I have a sophisticated-enough mail
>>service that I can supply an address to which messages will be put in
>>a special place...and my only hassle is deleting the hundreds of
>>spams before that special place overloads my mail allotment on the
>>server.
>>
>>But I think somebody with just one address is going to have problems.
>>Maybe not today or tomorrow, but over time as bots harvest their
>>address from the NG posts.
>>
>>I used to post legit addresses in NGs and now my domain gets
>>7,000-8,000 spams per day....granted most of them are dictionary
>>attacks, but hundreds of them are to legitimate addresses I put in NG
>>posts before I caught on.
>
>
> Can't you just create a throw away account on hotmail or Yahoo and just
> write it off?
>
> Tom
>
>

That's what I did (yahoo) but my real email that I've had for years
suffers the same problems as Pete's.

Matt

 

[Shaun aRe]

"(Pete Cresswell)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Per (Pete Cresswell):
> >It made a *really* good impression..
>
> Except for register.php|Rules For Usage|Sender Address, which seemed kind
of
> strange to me.
>
> It requires all users include a valid "From" address on their posts.
>
> I can deal with that because I have a sophisticated-enough mail service
that I
> can supply an address to which messages will be put in a special
place...and my
> only hassle is deleting the hundreds of spams before that special place
> overloads my mail allotment on the server.
>
> But I think somebody with just one address is going to have problems.
Maybe
> not today or tomorrow, but over time as bots harvest their address from
the NG
> posts.
>
> I used to post legit addresses in NGs and now my domain gets 7,000-8,000
spams
> per day....granted most of them are dictionary attacks, but hundreds of
them are
> to legitimate addresses I put in NG posts before I caught on.

Yeah, that bit is a bit of a problem. When I subbed from this new addy, it
took a day to get my first spam back. Mind you, I think I'd posted over 200
messages over 7 news groups, excluding the HUGELY crossposted messages...
heheheh...




Shaun aRe

 

[(Pete Cresswell)]

Per Shaun aRe:
>Yeah, that bit is a bit of a problem. When I subbed from this new addy, it
>took a day to get my first spam back. Mind you, I think I'd posted over 200
>messages over 7 news groups, excluding the HUGELY crossposted messages...
>heheheh...

I just got a reply from Individual.

Turns out I didn't read their FAQ carefully enough.

It did say that all posts must have a legit return address, but later
http://news.individual.net/faq.php#5.3 says it's all right to use the .invalid
suffix. Something about "not polluting the namespace"... I guess the
important thing from their perspective is not to have to deal with a lot of
addressed that don't hit on any name server...and ".invalid" is enough of a
standard that they have code in place to weed those guys out painlessly.

Based on their FAQ, their responses, and this thread they've got *my* money.
I just hope they make enough to stay in biz.
--
PeteCresswell

 

[Shaun aRe]

"(Pete Cresswell)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Per Shaun aRe:
> >Yeah, that bit is a bit of a problem. When I subbed from this new addy,
it
> >took a day to get my first spam back. Mind you, I think I'd posted over
200
> >messages over 7 news groups, excluding the HUGELY crossposted messages...
> >heheheh...
>
> I just got a reply from Individual.
>
> Turns out I didn't read their FAQ carefully enough.
>
> It did say that all posts must have a legit return address, but later
> http://news.individual.net/faq.php#5.3 says it's all right to use the
..invalid
> suffix. Something about "not polluting the namespace"... I guess the
> important thing from their perspective is not to have to deal with a lot
of
> addressed that don't hit on any name server...and ".invalid" is enough of
a
> standard that they have code in place to weed those guys out painlessly.
>
> Based on their FAQ, their responses, and this thread they've got *my*
money.
> I just hope they make enough to stay in biz.
> --
> PeteCresswell


Cool - cheers Pete - I'll have to get around to remembering to get off my
**** and do something about that soon...ish ',;~}~


Cheers!


Shaun aRe
--
Sometimes, the true and living thought bubbling rapidly up from the
depths, surfaces with a severe case of the Benz.