On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Michael Geier wrote:
[... original message elided by poster ...]
> Maybe some people are taking my recommendation a little to strongly.
>
> In answer to your points:
> [1]If you belong to a list that does it, put them in your whitelist (in my
> opinion, any list you belong
On Tue, 2002-02-12 at 17:38, Michael Geier wrote:
> [1]If you belong to a list that does it, put them in your whitelist (in my
> opinion, any list you belong to should be in a whitelist anyway).
What happens for lists to which spammers submit mail? I'd like to be
able to still get effective fil
On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 07:38:58PM -0600, Michael Geier wrote:
| Maybe some people are taking my recommendation a little to strongly.
|
| In answer to your points:
| [1]If you belong to a list that does it, put them in your whitelist (in my
| opinion, any list you belong to should be in a whitel
On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 07:38:58PM -0600, Michael Geier wrote:
> Maybe some people are taking my recommendation a little to strongly.
>
> In answer to your points:
> [1]If you belong to a list that does it, put them in your whitelist (in my
> opinion, any list you belong to should be in a whitel
Maybe some people are taking my recommendation a little to strongly.
In answer to your points:
[1]If you belong to a list that does it, put them in your whitelist (in my
opinion, any list you belong to should be in a whitelist anyway).
[2] I frankly don't understand the point of that one...
[3
On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Michael Geier wrote:
> The attached email slipped under the threshold.
>
> However, something caught my eye. Generally, the from: domain and the
> reply-to: domain don't match on spam.
>
> Maybe we could compare against that?
For the love of god, NOO!
It's bad enough t
