Daniel Quinlan said:
> spam/0101.6a2f4ea2f70c6644dbd9d6c4c7311654
>
> Fewer bits would probably work if you find that too cumbersome, but
> the second version should be easy enough: ..
might as well! that's now in there.
--j.
---
This s
Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK; maybe rewriting the message-ids will help here, that should allow
> us to pick them out. I'll do that.
As someone else noted, that might mess with Message-ID tests. If not
the current ones, then future ones.
I was suggesting that you use MH folde
(trimmed cc list)
Daniel Quinlan said:
> 1. These messages could end up being falsely (or incorrectly) reported
>to Razor, DCC, Pyzor, etc. Certain RBLs too. I don't think the
>results for these distributed tests can be trusted in any way,
>shape, or form when running over a publi
> (Please feel free to forward this message to other possibly-interested
> parties.)
Some caveats (in decending order of concern):
1. These messages could end up being falsely (or incorrectly) reported
to Razor, DCC, Pyzor, etc. Certain RBLs too. I don't think the
results for these distr
