Hi Michael,
At 11:44 15-09-2015, Michael Wise wrote:
No, it doesn't.
After all, technically Message-ID is an optional field.
I bitch and moan about that, but nobody cares... They all end up
pointing to, "SHOULD", and I can't really do anything but :'(
It is recommended to add a "Message-ID" f
On 16/09/2015 04:44, Michael Wise wrote:
If this ML is going to become a forum for reporting spam, I'm gone.
Having been here for few years now, I have to say it does seem to be
getting worse, this aint anyone's support channel, and perhaps this
needs to be entered into the charter!
Cheer
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Steve Freegard wrote:
>
> On 15/09/15 18:24, Al Iverson via mailop.org wrote:
>>
>> Is this truly having an immediate negative impact operationally? It
>> seems like this could be feedback you could give them directly,
>> offlist, without having to share it with th
rom: Gil Bahat [mailto:g...@magisto.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 12:07 PM
To: Michael Wise mailto:michael.w...@microsoft.com>>
Cc: Steve Freegard mailto:steve.freeg...@fsl.com>>;
mailop@mailop.org<mailto:mailop@mailop.org>
Subject: Re: [mailop] Microsoft sending multiple Message
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:06:31PM +0300, Gil Bahat wrote:
> If I were you, I'd stick around the list, perhaps answer a bit less or only
> when you find things interesting.
…maybe adding a couple of lines to one's killfile(s)…
I think it's vital -- for the mail ecosystem -- that there are
represe
From: Gil Bahat [mailto:g...@magisto.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 12:07 PM
To: Michael Wise
Cc: Steve Freegard ; mailop@mailop.org
Subject: Re: [mailop] Microsoft sending multiple Message-ID headers in password
reset links..
Hi,
the archives will quickly tell you the list never was suc
On 15/09/15 19:44, Michael Wise via mailop.org wrote:
No, it doesn't.
After all, technically Message-ID is an optional field.
I bitch and moan about that, but nobody cares... They all end up pointing to,
"SHOULD", and I can't really do anything but :'(
Yeah - it might say SHOULD, but it's exp
On 15-09-15 11:44 AM, Michael Wise wrote:
No, it doesn't.
After all, technically Message-ID is an optional field.
I bitch and moan about that, but nobody cares... They all end up pointing to,
"SHOULD", and I can't really do anything but :'(
And the information is not pertinent.
If this ML is g
Been
> Processed." | Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool ?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@mailop.org] On Behalf Of Steve
> Freegard
> Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 11:33 AM
> To: mailop@mailop.org
> Subject: Re: [mailop] Micro
> On Sep 15, 2015, at 11:33 AM, Steve Freegard wrote:
>
>
> On 15/09/15 18:24, Al Iverson via mailop.org wrote:
>> Is this truly having an immediate negative impact operationally? It
>> seems like this could be feedback you could give them directly,
>> offlist, without having to share it with t
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 11:33 AM
To: mailop@mailop.org
Subject: Re: [mailop] Microsoft sending multiple Message-ID headers in password
reset links..
On 15/09/15 18:24, Al Iverson via
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=mailop.org&data=01%7c01%7cmichael.wise%40micr
On 15/09/15 18:24, Al Iverson via mailop.org wrote:
Is this truly having an immediate negative impact operationally? It
seems like this could be feedback you could give them directly,
offlist, without having to share it with the rest of us.
Very funny. Feedback to where? Their 1st line su
Michael Wise wrote:
> I'm considering unsubing from the list.
That would be a great loss.
Anne
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
http://chilli.nosignal.org/mailman/listinfo/mailop
n
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 10:24 AM
To: mailop
Subject: Re: [mailop] Microsoft sending multiple Message-ID headers in password
reset links..
Is this truly having an immediate negative impact operationally? It
seems like this could be feedback you could give them directly,
offlist, wi
Is this truly having an immediate negative impact operationally? It
seems like this could be feedback you could give them directly,
offlist, without having to share it with the rest of us.
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Michael Peddemors
wrote:
> [...]
--
Al Iverson | Minneapolis, MN | (312)
Return-Path:
Delivered-To:
Received: from bay004-omc1s25.hotmail.com (HELO
BAY004-OMC1S25.hotmail.com) (65.54.190.36)
by with (AES256-SHA256 encrypted) SMTP
(7e98ec56-5b63-11e5-9f23-001e67492cec); Mon, 14 Sep 2015
21:37:40 -0700
Received: from CY1SCH030011851 ([65.54.190.59])
16 matches
Mail list logo
