On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:44:00PM -0700, Robert Spier wrote: > >On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 08:44:20AM -0700, Stephen Rawls wrote: > >> The last two (well, the only two :) patches I sent > >> were counted as spam. Some of the points were becuase > > Sorry about that! I'm trying to be better safe than sorry in > preventing spam from getting to the list.
I don't like spam. Thanks for keeping it out. > Yes. We periodically check the spam queue and move things to the > right place. I have a todo list item for resending them to the list, > but until that's done, they'll just be less noticed until someone goes > through open tickets. How do you recruit new "someone"s? Are they the same sort of "someone"s who manage perl5 bugs? > >1: Changing your machine so that it doesn't think it's yahoo.com > >2: Adding a Reply-To: back to your yahoo address > > > >(clearly if you currently need to have your machine think it's in a sub-domain > >of yahoo.com so that your messages come From: yahoo.com, then you'd have to > >do both of the above to get mail to go back to your yahoo account) > > He's using Yahoo webmail. And (IIRC) Spam Assassin is then penalising him for having a *false* yahoo header in there? So you can't win, unless you fake Yahoo's headers to a better standard then Yahoo fake them? :-( > >I'm curious why Reply-To is scored so highly - I don't set any Reply-To in > >my messages, and I didn't think that it was normal practice. > > Ask the SpamAssassin folks. ;) Oh, maybe I should have asked them the above question then. Nicholas Clark
