On Tuesday 31 December 2002 02:45 pm, William Devine, II wrote:
> Haven't you ever gotten a pop-up on Internet Explorer selling PopUp
> blockers?
No, never. Then again I don't enable Javascript. Disabling pop-ups and
pop-unders is as simple as disabling Java and Javascript, which are
mostly eye-
Well, by continuing to repost the content of the alleged
'spam', I think you all are 'pimping' this spam over and
over quite handily.
--Paul
--
William J. Broad: "The crux... is that the vast majority of the mass
of the universe seems to be missing."
-
In installed privoxy on my server, and proxy my systems through
it...blocks popups quite nicely, too.
On Tue, 31 Dec 2002, William Devine, II wrote:
> Haven't you ever gotten a pop-up on Internet Explorer selling PopUp
> blockers?
> I switched to Mozilla about 5-6 months ago and disabled javascr
Haven't you ever gotten a pop-up on Internet Explorer selling PopUp
blockers?
I switched to Mozilla about 5-6 months ago and disabled javascript popup's
in it and have not missed any of those damn popups!
William
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Beha
I don't know that I'd list it as spam, though.
It was apparently sent from a list subscriber, to that list, regarding a
possible way to help keep spam off their list.
If it had come from someone not on their list, but got into their list, I
might agree that it might be considered spam, but...
Please...where did Brian even imply that anyone from SpamAssassin or Razor
had anything to do with it?
On Tue, 31 Dec 2002, Jordan Ritter wrote:
> For the record, we had nothing to do with that message or its
> distribution (nor did we have any knowledge of it until you forwarded
> this).
>
> F
Well.. since the list was spam free... I'd call it spam..
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Burger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Brian May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: [Razor-users] Spam pimping Cloudmar
Actually, the information would be useful for us to at least know
about. However, the proper channel would be ``[EMAIL PROTECTED]''.
We appreciate being kept informed, you never know what's goin on out
there..
--jordan
On Tue, Dec 31, 2002 at 11:15:35AM -0800, Brian May wrote:
# No forging ther
I should have worded my message differently... I was not accusing Cloudmark
of spamming... but a spammer "pimping an anti-spam product by Cloudmark..."
I can see how one may remotely assume that I was blaming Cloudmark, but I
wasn't. (unless there is a steve at cloudmark that has an enter.net addre
er" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 10:18 AM
Subject: [SAtalk] Re: [Razor-users] Spam pimping Cloudmark...
On Tue, Dec 31, 2002 at 10:13:14AM -0800, Jordan Ritter wrote:
> FYI, It's extremely silly to assum
For the record, we had nothing to do with that message or its
distribution (nor did we have any knowledge of it until you forwarded
this).
FYI, It's extremely silly to assume we had anything to do with it,
especially if you knew anything about Vipul or myself.
--jordan
On Tue, Dec 31, 2002 at 09
On Tue, Dec 31, 2002 at 10:13:14AM -0800, Jordan Ritter wrote:
> FYI, It's extremely silly to assume we had anything to do with it,
> especially if you knew anything about Vipul or myself.
It's probably like the people who spam using spamcop addresses. If you
can't beat 'em, forge their name and
12 matches
Mail list logo
