• FAQ: Current Usenet spam thresholds and guidelines

    From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 14 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 21 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 28 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 4 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 11 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 18 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 25 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 4 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 11 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 18 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 25 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 1 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 8 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 15 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 22 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 29 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 6 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 13 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 20 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 27 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 3 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 10 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 17 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 24 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 1 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 8 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 15 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 22 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 29 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 5 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 12 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 19 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 26 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 2 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 9 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 16 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 23 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 30 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 7 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 14 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 21 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 28 00:02:03 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 4 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 11 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 18 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 25 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 2 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 9 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 16 00:02:02 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 23 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 30 00:02:01 2018
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 6 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 13 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 20 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 27 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 3 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 10 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 17 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 24 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 3 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 10 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 17 00:02:02 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 24 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 31 00:02:02 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 7 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 14 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 21 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 28 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 5 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 12 00:02:02 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 19 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 26 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 2 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 9 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 16 00:02:02 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 23 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 30 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 7 00:02:02 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 14 00:02:02 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 21 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 28 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 4 00:02:02 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 11 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 18 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 25 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 1 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 8 00:02:02 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 15 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 22 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 29 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 6 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 13 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 20 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 27 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 3 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 10 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 17 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 24 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 1 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 8 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 15 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 22 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 29 00:02:01 2019
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 5 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 12 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 19 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 26 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 2 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 9 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 16 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 23 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 1 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 8 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 15 00:02:03 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 22 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 29 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 5 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 12 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 19 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 26 00:02:02 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 3 00:02:02 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 10 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 17 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 24 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 31 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 7 00:02:02 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 14 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 21 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 28 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 5 00:02:02 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 12 00:02:02 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 19 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 26 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 2 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 9 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 16 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 23 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 30 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 6 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 13 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 20 00:02:02 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 27 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 4 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 11 00:02:02 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 18 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 25 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 1 00:02:02 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 8 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 15 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 22 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 29 00:02:02 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 6 00:02:02 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 13 00:02:02 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 20 00:02:01 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 27 00:02:02 2020
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 3 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 10 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 17 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 24 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 31 00:02:02 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 7 00:02:02 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 14 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 21 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 28 00:02:02 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 7 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 14 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 21 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 28 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 4 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 11 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 18 00:02:02 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 25 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 2 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 9 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 16 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 23 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 30 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 6 00:02:02 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 13 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 20 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 27 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 4 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 11 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 18 00:02:02 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 25 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 1 00:02:02 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 8 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 15 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 22 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 29 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 5 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 12 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 19 00:02:02 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 26 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 3 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 10 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 17 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 24 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 31 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 7 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 14 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 21 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 28 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 5 00:02:02 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 12 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 19 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 26 00:02:01 2021
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 2 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 9 00:02:02 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 16 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 23 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 30 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 6 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 13 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 20 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 27 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 6 00:02:02 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 13 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 20 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 27 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 3 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 10 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 17 00:02:02 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 24 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 1 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 8 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 15 00:02:02 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 22 00:02:02 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 29 00:02:02 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 5 00:02:02 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 12 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 19 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 26 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 3 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 10 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 17 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 24 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 31 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 7 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 14 00:02:02 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 21 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 28 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 4 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 11 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 18 00:02:02 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 25 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 2 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 9 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 16 00:02:02 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 23 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 30 00:02:02 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 6 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 13 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 20 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 27 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 4 00:02:02 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 11 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 18 00:02:01 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 25 00:02:02 2022
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 1 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 8 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 15 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 22 00:02:02 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 29 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 5 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 12 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 19 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 26 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 5 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 12 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 19 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Mar 26 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 2 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 9 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 16 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 23 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 30 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 14 00:02:02 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 21 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 28 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 4 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 11 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 18 00:02:02 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 25 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 2 00:02:02 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 9 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 16 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 23 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 30 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 6 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 13 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 20 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 27 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 3 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 10 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 17 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 24 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 1 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 8 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 15 00:02:02 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 22 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 29 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 5 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 12 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 19 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 26 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 3 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 10 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 17 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 24 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 31 00:02:01 2023
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 7 00:02:01 2024
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 14 00:02:01 2024
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 21 00:02:01 2024
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Skirvin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 28 00:02:01 2024
    XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, news.answers

    Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq
    Posting-Frequency: weekly
    Last-modified: 1998/11/10
    URL: http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/spam/
    Maintainer: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin)
    Original-Author: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

    Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds
    and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent.
    It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an
    informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam"
    usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical
    article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is
    included in the determination. These are examples of substantively
    identical articles:

    - byte-for-byte identical messages
    - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for
    each group it appears in.
    - advertising the same service.
    - articles that consist solely of the same signature
    - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's
    postings, but are otherwise identical.

    Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group.
    Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

    Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more
    than one group each have been made.

    Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad"
    when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

    This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of
    EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but
    most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

    A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to
    many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is
    abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

    A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to
    quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a
    single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the
    square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted
    to).

    Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one
    to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

    The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which
    may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum
    of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg:
    one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

    The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher
    end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

    A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it
    is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in
    the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg:
    one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

    (sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2
    ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

    Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

    The thresholds for spam cancels are based _only_ on one or more of the following measures:

    1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period.
    2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day
    sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the
    past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed,
    unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to
    cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so
    posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make
    money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds
    several years ago. This author recommends one posting
    cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than
    once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

    A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would
    have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to
    limitations in Usenet software.

    These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8
    and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out
    of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

    These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the
    message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if
    it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or
    not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on _how many times_ it was said
    and not _what_ was said.

    Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
    if you need this patch.

    Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

    The newsgroup news.announce.newusers
    <URL:news:news.announce.newusers>

    "What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1>

    "What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part2>

    "FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/advertising/how-to/part1>

    "A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1>

    "Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes. <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1>

    "Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al <URL:ftp://ftp.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1>

    Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping
    Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog"
    (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

    "Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin <URL:http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>

    RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
    <URL:http://rfc.net/rfc1855.html>

    The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

    A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to commerce@acpub.duke.edu.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)