4 ms·
There is one major problem : the answers are sent immediatly after receiving the email. This is obviously suspicious, considering most of the mails require at
by jnaddef 10y ago
There is one major problem : the answers are sent immediatly after receiving the email.
This is obviously suspicious, considering most of the mails require at least a few minutes of reading + time to write the mail.
I guess adding a delay would improve the bot's credibility by a lot!
- jaytaylor 10y agoAgreed, that sounds like a good idea! I encourage you to file an issue at their source repo: https://gitlab.com/stavros/Spamnesty/issues https://gitlab.com/stavros/Spamnesty/issues
- MrZongle2 10y ago"I guess adding a delay would improve the bot's credibility by a lot!" And effectiveness in stealing spammers' time. If the bot immediately auto-responds to each subsequent (presumably human-initiated at this point) email, then the spammer may more easily follow the thread. On the other hand, if the bot waits 30-90 minutes, the spammer likely has gone on to other things. There's an additional (albeit minor) cognitive load here if they want to engage with a potential sucker.
- StavrosK 10y agoIt actually has a random delay of 1-8 hours, which shows in the timestamp. It only sends the first email right away, because it presumably took you some time to forward it to Spamnesty.
- rrauenza 10y agoWhat are you using for the event management? I wonder if using celery and rabbitmq or redis as the queue would help simplify things. With it, you just schedule asynchronous tasks in the future ... you don't have to manage the event queue.
- StavrosK 10y agoThe box these are running on is already pretty full (it's where I keep all my side-projects, and it's got around eight running on it now), so I'm trying to keep it lean. Features definitely get cut on a cost/effectiveness ratio.