"Patrick Bihan-Faou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The only thing I am pointing out is that the choice of doing spam
> filtering is a personal one, and one has to understand that it will
> kill legitimate mail as well.
Okay, sorry for the warm response. If ``personal'' means the same thing
to you that it does to me, then we agree perfectly.
(For example, ISPs unilaterally rejecting emails for their customers,
without specific authorization is not a ``personal'' decision--and it's
unacceptable. Even RBL use, which makes sense, should not be done without
informing customers.)
Len.
--
Experience has shown again and again that Microsoft regards security
problems as public relations problems. Hence, I would not trust any
claims that Microsoft makes about changes in PPTP that it has, or will,
make.
-- Bruce Schneier
- Poor documentation of anti-spam options? Chris Hardie
- Re: Poor documentation of anti-spam options? Dave Sill
- Re: Poor documentation of anti-spam options? Jon Rust
- Re: Poor documentation of anti-spam option... Charles Cazabon
- Re: Poor documentation of anti-spam op... Patrick Bihan-Faou
- Re: Poor documentation of anti-sp... Len Budney
- Re: Poor documentation of ant... Patrick Bihan-Faou
- Re: Poor documentation of... Len Budney
- Re: Poor documentation of... richard
- Re: Poor documentation of anti-spam option... Dave Sill
- Re: Poor documentation of anti-spam op... Jon Rust
- Re: Poor documentation of anti-spam op... Paul Schinder
- Re: Poor documentation of anti-sp... Patrick Bihan-Faou
- Re: Poor documentation of ant... David Dyer-Bennet
- Re: Poor documentation of ant... Paul Schinder
- Re: Poor documentation of... Patrick Bihan-Faou
- Re: Poor documentation of... Peter van Dijk
- Re: Poor documentation of... Patrick Bihan-Faou
