next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects --Apple-Mail-132-635309548 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Hi everyone: Just to clarify, the 950,000 spam messages per day being received at Dalhousie is not due to a spam storm. That is average number received. every day and it has been steadily growing. In April of 2005 the average number was 450,000 per day, so it has almost doubled in the last 1.5 years. Pat On Dec 8, 2006, at 5:49 PM, David & Alison Webster wrote: > Hi Steve & All, Dec 8, 2006 > I suspect that this current spam storm, about 950,000 spam messages > /day at Dal as I recall, will soon blow over. > Yours truly, Dave Webster, Kentville > > Steve Shaw wrote: > >> Re. Don's comment below, I recall some explanation for the haphazard >> delays on NatureNS from our list administrator a while back, but >> deleted it. The redwing post from Dorothy Poole on Dec 1 arrived >> here on Dec 6 -- taking 5 days -- while some posts seem to come >> through quite quickly, same day. The whole back-and-forth nature of >> communication is now chaotic. Rather than asking for explanations >> (presumably overloaded hardware, or new spam), is there any prospect >> of improvement now that the system has deteriorated this far? Canada >> Post would be quicker. >> A while ago, Blake Maybank (I think it was) commented that NatureNS >> is not archived and therefore not searchable, and suggested to >> consider that the list be switched to some other carrier that does >> have these facilities. Is it time to consider this seriously, for >> the additional reason of the current variable and sometimes extreme >> delays? I'm not technically well informed on this to know how much >> trouble this would be, or who would get stuck with the job, but some >> people on the list seem to be knowledgeable about the technicalities. >> Anyone want to bite into this one again? Or is the performance >> likely to get back to where it was a few weeks back? >> Steve >> Halifax >> >> On 6-Dec-06, at 9:54 AM, Don MacNeill wrote: >> >>> Just a note for people to check the dates that messages were sent to >>> NatureNS. This note from Dorothy relates to a Monday siting but >>> wasn't >>> received until Wednesday. I sent one at 03:30 PM re our sighting on >>> Tuesday >>> which hasn't appeared yet although it was sent to NS-RBA at the same >>> time >>> and appeared there immediately. On the other hand, one from Jim >>> Wolford >>> later yesterday showed up right away. >>> >>> I recommend that any of you that are interested in timely >>> information on >>> bird sightings join the NS-RBA. >>> >>> Now we'll see when this message eventually arrives at NatureNS. >>> >>> Don >>> >>> Don MacNeill >> >> >> > > > > ======================================================================== == Patrick Kelly Director of Computer Facilities ======================================================================== == Faculty of Architecture and Planning Dalhousie University ======================================================================== == PO Box 1000 Stn Central 5410 Spring Garden Road Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 2X4 Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 2X4 Canada Canada ======================================================================== == Phone:(902) 494-3294 FAX:(902) 423-6672 E-mail:patrick.kelly@dal.ca ======================================================================== == --Apple-Mail-132-635309548 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=US-ASCII Hi everyone: Just to clarify, the 950,000 spam messages per day being received at Dalhousie is not due to a spam storm. That is average number received. every day and it has been steadily growing. In April of 2005 the average number was 450,000 per day, so it has almost doubled in the last 1.5 years. Pat On Dec 8, 2006, at 5:49 PM, David & Alison Webster wrote: <excerpt>Hi Steve & All, Dec 8, 2006 I suspect that this current spam storm, about 950,000 spam messages /day at Dal as I recall, will soon blow over. Yours truly, Dave Webster, Kentville Steve Shaw wrote: <excerpt>Re. Don's comment below, I recall some explanation for the haphazard delays on NatureNS from our list administrator a while back, but deleted it. The redwing post from Dorothy Poole on Dec 1 arrived here on Dec 6 -- taking 5 days -- while some posts seem to come through quite quickly, same day. The whole back-and-forth nature of communication is now chaotic. Rather than asking for explanations (presumably overloaded hardware, or new spam), is there any prospect of improvement now that the system has deteriorated this far? Canada Post would be quicker. A while ago, Blake Maybank (I think it was) commented that NatureNS is not archived and therefore not searchable, and suggested to consider that the list be switched to some other carrier that does have these facilities. Is it time to consider this seriously, for the additional reason of the current variable and sometimes extreme delays? I'm not technically well informed on this to know how much trouble this would be, or who would get stuck with the job, but some people on the list seem to be knowledgeable about the technicalities. Anyone want to bite into this one again? Or is the performance likely to get back to where it was a few weeks back? Steve Halifax On 6-Dec-06, at 9:54 AM, Don MacNeill wrote: <excerpt>Just a note for people to check the dates that messages were sent to NatureNS. This note from Dorothy relates to a Monday siting but wasn't received until Wednesday. I sent one at 03:30 PM re our sighting on Tuesday which hasn't appeared yet although it was sent to NS-RBA at the same time and appeared there immediately. On the other hand, one from Jim Wolford later yesterday showed up right away. I recommend that any of you that are interested in timely information on bird sightings join the NS-RBA. Now we'll see when this message eventually arrives at NatureNS. Don Don MacNeill </excerpt> </excerpt> </excerpt><fontfamily><param>Courier</param> =====================================================