Re: [SAtalk] 2.55 and FAILURE NOTICE's

2003-09-23 Thread Daniel Quinlan
Robert Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi, have any improvements been made to sort out spammers who are > forging failure notices? Yes, in 2.60. Daniel --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://th

[SAtalk] 2.55 and FAILURE NOTICE's

2003-09-23 Thread Robert Nicholson
Hi, have any improvements been made to sort out spammers who are forging failure notices? From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon Sep 22, 2003 3:05:39 PM Asia/Bangkok To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Return-Path: <> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [SAtalk] 2.55 and FAILURE NOTICE's

2003-09-22 Thread Robert Nicholson
er 22, 2003 1:05 PM Subject: [SAtalk] 2.55 and FAILURE NOTICE's Hi, have any improvements been made to sort out spammers who are forging failure notices? From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon Sep 22, 2003 3:05:39 PM Asia/Bangkok To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subj

Re: [SAtalk] 2.55 and FAILURE NOTICE's

2003-09-22 Thread Ralf Guenthner
- Original Message - From: "Robert Nicholson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 1:05 PM Subject: [SAtalk] 2.55 and FAILURE NOTICE's > Hi, have any improvements been made to sort out spammers who are > forgin

[SAtalk] 2.55 and FAILURE NOTICE's

2003-09-22 Thread Robert Nicholson
Hi, have any improvements been made to sort out spammers who are forging failure notices? From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon Sep 22, 2003 3:05:39 PM Asia/Bangkok To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Return-Path: <> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]