> Why do people think it's acceptable for their stupid anti-spam measures > to inconvenience others?
I am indirectly responsible for M. Mescam message. He was BCC'ed to my original mail annoucing Babelbox documentation (I had my own reasons for the BCC). However, as I did setup the Reply-To field to the mailing list AND as he never received mails from my Debian address first, his automated greylisting system automatically answered and did so using the Reply-To field. So, finally, the request which was supposed to go to me finally went to the list..:-) I was aware of his greylisting system and I should have imagined this when sending my mail. Apologies to list subscribers for that. About the "stupid" antispam system, I guess he knows this is not a perfect system, but please imagine the amount of unsollicited mail (not really spam...mostly "targeted" emails) received by a big organisation IT director on a email address he wants to keep very clean. I'll try help him improving this system for avoiding cases like this one, probably by making it NOT respect Reply-To fields at first. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]