March 6, 2005
DeSpamization
I recently ran into a problem with MT Blacklist. It would not take any new entries. I emailed my designer, who dug around and found that there is a maximum number of entries on the blacklist (around 3900). So, for those of you using MT-Blacklist, you might want to check your housekeeping and be sure to get rid of things that are covered already (for instance, no need to have commies.jerks.org if you already have jerks.org). Since the stupid thing would not let me check off the offenders and delete them en masse, I had to take a long time to pick out each individual one. So far I am halfway through the "b's."
Now, to be more efficient in my Blacklist utilization, I added some a-bomb type strings, for instance, ".info" and ".us" since I have never found a real domain worth going to with either of those. Unfortunately I need to learn some syntax, because it seems to have attacked anything that has "us" in it, which was certainly not my intent. For example, "music" gets nixed. So I dropped ".us" but there might be some other strings that I did not drop, so if your comment gets rejected for something seemingly innocuous, please drop me a line at EKeilholtz [at] aol [dot] com.
Speaking of which, I got the following comment, but it seems to have been zapped, which is too bad, as it is a rather thoughtful one. Obviously, I think that the commenter has some errors in his thinking, but there is something of a grain of truth in it. He (or she, I don't know) was commenting on my post on the problems of canonizing the deceased at funerals:
Agree completely with Erik. Modern Catholic funerals (not Requiem Masses any more, mind you, but "Masses of Christian Burial") have become pretty much a testimonial, show-and-tell and gabfest about the deceased, rather than a genuine opportunity for mourning and grief before burying the dead, commending their souls to God and moving on with our lives. Anyone who has ever lost someone close knows that the real, bone-numbing grief goes on for a significant period -- sometimes years. Only with the passage of time do we come to balance our sense of loss -- and sometimes anger -- with a reasuring sense of satisfaction and completion over the endearing and enduring memories we have of the deceased loved one. But today's Catholic funerals try to make everyone recall jolly incidents about "good old Joe" and enjoy several good rounds of laughter at his expense just days after losing him. This is forced, unnatural and contributes to our frustration at the lack of being able to genuinely grieve without looking like a party pooper or a weak person emotionally. This is completely foreign to the centuries-long purpose of Catholic Requiems. If one goes to a grief counselor after a loss, no such trained person would make one feel bad about breaking down into hysterical sobbing, because that is often an important part of the process of overcoming and recovering from grief and loss. But Catholic funerals are now supposed to be times for "celebrating so-and-so's life." There's plenty of time for that once our grieving process starts to heal and we can carry on with a less raw sense of loss. There will be black vestments at my Requiem, and no happy-talk story-telling. They can do that at my wake or at a non-religious memorial service, of those left behind are so inclined. The Catholic hierarchy wonders why they can't enforce their "culture of life" on millions of Catholics, who shun church doctrine on abortion. Maybe it's because the church has abandoned it's own teachi
ngs on what death is all about, and how solemn and dignified an undertaking is a Requiem Mass. If every death is just an opportunity for "celebration" and merriment, how do they think they can get the faithful to take too seriously opposition to abortion and the death penalty. Don't they get it? (That's one of the reasons I'm not a Catholic, in the interests of full disclosure.)
To this commentator, I must point out that the reasons to be Catholic far outweigh the nonsense that one too frequently encounters in the liturgies. I would rather endure a century of hippy-dippy liturgies, guitars and pianos and "On Eagles' Wings" over a minute of beautiful High Anglitic liturgy, even if the High Anglitic liturgy were breathtaking in its grandeur and solemnity.
Posted by erik at March 6, 2005 1:26 AM | TrackBack# MT-Blacklist Version 1.6.2
#
# Last update: 2005/02/27 12:25:36
# Number of entries: 7237
I'll spare you the rest of the list - you can copy it if you want at
http://www.weboughtthefarm.com/blacklist.txt
Posted by: stephen at March 10, 2005 6:54 AM6K!?! What version do you use?
I am avoiding closing comments, because I get some interesting ones on back comments and would hate to end that, although I have had experiences like you describe and have been tempted in the past.
As for the ".us" thing, I am confused, because I did use the period. For some reason it tagged other things that just had the "us" in them.
Posted by: Erik Keilholtz at March 9, 2005 10:45 AMErik - our mileage appears to vary. I have about 6k entries on my blacklist and it's still growing. I periodically scour the web using a special query to find long blacklists and merge them with my own. I'm sure I could clean it up a bit with some of the regex killer expressions. The big pain is that it takes a long time to purge. The good news is that spam is getting lighter all the time.
When you stick in a new entry and proof it against your existing entries, you get a pretty good idea of what words should not be on the list. Don't delete the entry, check what is sending up the red flag and go back and delete it from your blacklist instead. Why wouldn't you use ".us" instead of "us", for instance?
You might also want to check out mt close comments. This puts a time limit on posting comments to old entries. I put this on after some bright spark put two spams on every one of my entries. Now I think they're open for 10 days or so, then closed. It's a bit draconian, but it cuts down on the recycle.
Posted by: stephen at March 8, 2005 6:45 AM