On 27/03/2015 12:23, Noel Butler wrote:
> On 26/03/2015 23:42, David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:37:08 +0100
> Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> i have to show nothing after for nearly a decade most german IT
> magazines had articles about that topic written by law experts
> The only
On 26/03/2015 23:42, David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:37:08 +0100
> Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> i have to show nothing after for nearly a decade most german IT
>> magazines had articles about that topic written by law experts
>
> The only link I found written by a German law ex
On 26/03/2015 23:34, David F. Skoll wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A followup:
>
> 1) has anyone been convicted under 303a StGB for suppressing email during
> spam filtering?
I bet not :) Its likely a law introduced to stop anally retentive jerks
from having hissy fits and deleting other peoples data, t
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 17:27:03 -0600
"@lbutlr" wrote:
> > ]]] If action is taken in the delivery process, with the result
> > that the ]]] message does not reach its goal, the e-mail is
> > "suppressed".
> > How does that not apply to a 5xx reject?
> Because a reject happens before the delivery p
On 26 Mar 2015, at 08:05 , David F. Skoll wrote:
>
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:54:07 +0100
> Robert Schetterer wrote:
>
>> Uff , why should i waste my time in telling you the untruth...
>
> I took a look at the Heise article and Google Translate says:
>
> ]]] If action is taken in the delivery p
On 26 Mar 2015, at 06:43 , David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 12:09:58 +0100 Reindl Harald
> wrote:
>> why in the world would a reject *before queue* trigger a backscatter
>> or bounce on my side?
> How do you do before-queue rejection of a message
Reject it.
> Solve that problem, an
On 26 Mar 2015, at 06:38 , David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:53:49 +0100 Reindl Harald
> wrote:
>> accepted means your SMTP sevrer responded with a 250 status code and
>> not with a 4x temporary or 5x permanent error aka rejected the message
>
> No. Accepted means delivered to the
On 26/03/15 22:23, Tom Hendrikx wrote:
Your single message was delivered by two different hosts, with a
single recipient in each.
This is actually very logical because the recipients don't share the
same MX hosts or IP addresses.
*nod* - I'd missed that fact when I glanced over this thread
> On 25 Mar 2015, at 18:25 , David F. Skoll wrote:
>
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:08:34 -0600
> "@lbutlr" wrote:
>
>> There is a difference between ___block___ and ___silently discard___.
>
>> Blocking is fine, silently discarding is just evil and should be
>> illegal everywhere.
>
> Nonsense.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 26-03-15 17:28, Steve Freegard wrote:
> On 26/03/15 13:47, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> that below was *one* message with two different recipients
>>
>> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.1, tag-level=5.5, block-level=8.0
>> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 10:12:22 -0500 (CDT)
Dave Funk wrote:
If they are compatible you respond with a 250, if not with a 452 (or
other 45* type reply).
On 26.03.15 11:52, David F. Skoll wrote:
We looked at doing this. There are some serious downsides:
1) Some senders (for example, mailing li
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:55:27 -0400
Michael Orlitzky wrote:
If one of your customer domains has non-default settings, give them
their own IP address and a separate MX record pointing to that
address.
On 26.03.15 12:54, David F. Skoll wrote:
We filter more than 8000 domains. That is not feasi
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:55:27 -0400
Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> If one of your customer domains has non-default settings, give them
> their own IP address and a separate MX record pointing to that
> address.
We filter more than 8000 domains. That is not feasible.
Regards,
David.
On 26/03/15 13:47, Reindl Harald wrote:
that below was *one* message with two different recipients
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.1, tag-level=5.5, block-level=8.0
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.1, tag-level=5.5, block-level=8.0
I hate to piss on your parade, but your example here is totally flaw
Am 26.03.2015 um 16:39 schrieb David F. Skoll:
> I find this discussion intriguing. The German law cited earlier also
> forbids you from changing data (original German word "verändert" ---
> did I get that right?)
>
> It seems to me this could make subject tagging illegal. In fact, a rigid
> int
On 03/26/2015 08:43 AM, David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 12:09:58 +0100
> Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> why in the world would a reject *before queue* trigger a backscatter
>> or bounce on my side?
>
> How do you do before-queue rejection of a message that is...
>
> 1) Directed to multip
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 10:12:22 -0500 (CDT)
Dave Funk wrote:
> If they are compatible you respond with a 250, if not with a 452 (or
> other 45* type reply).
We looked at doing this. There are some serious downsides:
1) Some senders (for example, mailing list tools) send to quite a number
of recip
Am 26.03.2015 um 16:39 schrieb David F. Skoll:
I find this discussion intriguing. The German law cited earlier also
forbids you from changing data (original German word "verändert" ---
did I get that right?)
It seems to me this could make subject tagging illegal. In fact, a rigid
interpretati
I find this discussion intriguing. The German law cited earlier also
forbids you from changing data (original German word "verändert" ---
did I get that right?)
It seems to me this could make subject tagging illegal. In fact, a rigid
interpretation could make SMTP illegal since you add a Receive
On 3/26/2015 11:23 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 26.03.2015 um 16:03 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
On 3/26/2015 9:54 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
so again , there are exceptions, but in general you are not allowed
to silent discard mail in germany.
Unless there are MASSIVE translation issues, th
Am 26.03.2015 um 16:19 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
On 3/26/2015 11:11 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
what he describes is not backscatter, cause the mail is rejected during
smtp imcome stage, wich means the server simply didnt take the mail
during the running smtp session,
This argument to me assu
Am 26.03.2015 um 16:19 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
> On 3/26/2015 11:11 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
>> what he describes is not backscatter, cause the mail is rejected during
>> smtp imcome stage, wich means the server simply didnt take the mail
>> during the running smtp session,
> This argument to
Am 26.03.2015 um 16:03 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
> On 3/26/2015 9:54 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
>> so again , there are exceptions, but in general you are not allowed
>> to silent discard mail in germany.
> Unless there are MASSIVE translation issues, the answer is exactly what
> DFS proposed: co
On 3/26/2015 11:11 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
what he describes is not backscatter, cause the mail is rejected during
smtp imcome stage, wich means the server simply didnt take the mail
during the running smtp session,
This argument to me assumes that their isn't a server in the middle of
the
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015, Kris Deugau wrote:
David F. Skoll wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 15:05:06 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
* spamass-milter -r 8.0
* messages above 8.0 are *rejected*
Silently? Or do you generate an NDR? I'm genuinely curious as to how you:
1) Accept mail for some recipients
Am 26.03.2015 um 15:55 schrieb Reindl Harald:
>
> Am 26.03.2015 um 15:52 schrieb Antony Stone:
>> On Thursday 26 March 2015 at 15:45:07 (EU time), Reindl Harald wrote:
>>
>>> Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
>>>
>>>ad...@rhsoft.net
>>>
>>> Technical details of perman
On 3/26/2015 9:54 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
so again , there are exceptions, but in general you are not allowed
to silent discard mail in germany.
Unless there are MASSIVE translation issues, the answer is exactly what
DFS proposed: consent from the users of the system.
From http://www.heis
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 15:57:14 +0100
Robert Schetterer wrote:
> David, reject means your server dont take a mail, the sender
> mailserver may bounce it back, after some time , its not your job to
> take care of that.
Yes, I'm pretty sure I understand the difference between reject and discard.
What
Am 26.03.2015 um 15:58 schrieb Antony Stone:
On Thursday 26 March 2015 at 15:55:52 (EU time), Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 26.03.2015 um 15:52 schrieb Antony Stone:
Surely this message is backscatter, though?
It's being sent to the (apparent) sender, in response to a message which
you know is ide
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 15:45:07 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> boah postfix responds with a "postfix/cleanup[21827]: 3lCS043tlCz1l:
> milter-reject: END-OF-MESSAGE" to the delivering client and the
> server on the other side generates a bounce containing the reject
> message
So then the sender think
On Thursday 26 March 2015 at 15:55:52 (EU time), Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 26.03.2015 um 15:52 schrieb Antony Stone:
>
> > Surely this message is backscatter, though?
> >
> > It's being sent to the (apparent) sender, in response to a message which
> > you know is identified as spam
>
> NOT IT IS
Am 26.03.2015 um 15:05 schrieb David F. Skoll:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:54:07 +0100
> Robert Schetterer wrote:
>
>> Uff , why should i waste my time in telling you the untruth...
>
> I took a look at the Heise article and Google Translate says:
>
> ]]] If action is taken in the delivery process
Am 26.03.2015 um 15:52 schrieb Antony Stone:
On Thursday 26 March 2015 at 15:45:07 (EU time), Reindl Harald wrote:
Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
ad...@rhsoft.net
Technical details of permanent failure:
Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected
On Thursday 26 March 2015 at 15:45:07 (EU time), Reindl Harald wrote:
> Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
>
> ad...@rhsoft.net
>
> Technical details of permanent failure:
> Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the server
> for the recipient dom
Am 26.03.2015 um 15:08 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 15:05:06 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
* spamass-milter -r 8.0
* messages above 8.0 are *rejected*
Silently? Or do you generate an NDR? I'm genuinely curious as to how you:
i explained it multiple times, look at the logs at
David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 15:05:06 +0100
> Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> * spamass-milter -r 8.0
>> * messages above 8.0 are *rejected*
>
> Silently? Or do you generate an NDR? I'm genuinely curious as to how you:
>
> 1) Accept mail for some recipients
>
> 2) Reject mail for ot
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 15:05:06 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> * spamass-milter -r 8.0
> * messages above 8.0 are *rejected*
Silently? Or do you generate an NDR? I'm genuinely curious as to how you:
1) Accept mail for some recipients
2) Reject mail for others
3) Without generating backscatter
4
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:54:07 +0100
Robert Schetterer wrote:
> Uff , why should i waste my time in telling you the untruth...
I took a look at the Heise article and Google Translate says:
]]] If action is taken in the delivery process, with the result that the
]]] message does not reach its goal
Am 26.03.2015 um 14:57 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:47:16 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
i proved you that i can assign differnt scores to a single message
with more than one recipients *per recipient*
Assigning scores is passive. What do you do with the scored messages?
If a
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:53:26 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> he is not allowed to silent throw away a letter, but if he can't
> deliver it it's sent back
"can't" deliver is different from "won't" deliver.
If you reject a message because you don't like its content, it's not
because you "can't" deli
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:47:16 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> i proved you that i can assign differnt scores to a single message
> with more than one recipients *per recipient*
Assigning scores is passive. What do you do with the scored messages?
If all your users are content to use tagging only, a
Am 26.03.2015 um 14:36 schrieb David F. Skoll:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:29:01 +0100
> Robert Schetterer wrote:
>
>> As i wrote, there maybe exceptions, but in general
>> youre not allowed to silent discard any mail ( unless its your own ,
>> or its a virus )
>
> Well, seeing as we have customers
Am 26.03.2015 um 14:43 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:39:52 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
* you write a mail
* your server get a 5xx reject from the destination
* your server generates a NDR and informs you
* you write a mail
* your server get a 200 repsonse
* the destination
Am 26.03.2015 um 14:37 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:33:08 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
boah - spamass-milter *rejects* above 8.0 points based on the header
What if one of the recipients is opted-out and has categorically stated
that he/she wants to receive every piece of ema
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:39:52 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> * you write a mail
> * your server get a 5xx reject from the destination
> * your server generates a NDR and informs you
> * you write a mail
> * your server get a 200 repsonse
> * the destination silent discards
> you *really* don't see
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:37:08 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> i have to show nothing after for nearly a decade most german IT
> magazines had articles about that topic written by law experts
The only link I found written by a German law expert said that
the it "may" apply to spam filtering if the r
Am 26.03.2015 um 14:34 schrieb David F. Skoll:
2) How is rejecting with a 5xx code any less of a "suppression" of the
data than silently discarding with a 2xx code?
* you write a mail
* your server get a 5xx reject from the destination
* your server generates a NDR and informs you
* you write
On 3/26/2015 9:19 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 26.03.2015 um 14:13 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:02:19 +0100
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Silent discard mail is mostly forbidden in the EU,
Is it? Could you perhaps point me to the EU directive stating this?
I'm sure there must
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:33:08 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> boah - spamass-milter *rejects* above 8.0 points based on the header
What if one of the recipients is opted-out and has categorically stated
that he/she wants to receive every piece of email? Then you're
breaking German law.
> basicly y
Am 26.03.2015 um 14:30 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:19:09 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
Is it? Could you perhaps point me to the EU directive stating this?
I'm sure there must be lots of qualifications
in germany 2 years jail
It says: "Whoever unlawfully deletes, modifie
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:29:01 +0100
Robert Schetterer wrote:
> As i wrote, there maybe exceptions, but in general
> youre not allowed to silent discard any mail ( unless its your own ,
> or its a virus )
Well, seeing as we have customers in the EU, I really would like to see
the text of the direc
Hi,
A followup:
1) has anyone been convicted under 303a StGB for suppressing email during
spam filtering?
2) How is rejecting with a 5xx code any less of a "suppression" of the
data than silently discarding with a 2xx code? In either case, the
recipient does not receive the mail. The fact that
Am 26.03.2015 um 14:27 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:14:10 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
That is a non-solution. You are assuming all users have the same
criteria for what is or isn't spammy content.
you stopped premature reading my repsonse - WHY?
look again at the "X-Spam
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:19:09 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> > Is it? Could you perhaps point me to the EU directive stating this?
> > I'm sure there must be lots of qualifications
> in germany 2 years jail
It says: "Whoever unlawfully deletes, modifies, suppresses..."
You have to show that sile
Am 26.03.2015 um 14:13 schrieb David F. Skoll:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:02:19 +0100
> Robert Schetterer wrote:
>
>> Silent discard mail is mostly forbidden in the EU,
>
> Is it? Could you perhaps point me to the EU directive stating this?
> I'm sure there must be lots of qualifications.
As i w
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:14:10 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> > That is a non-solution. You are assuming all users have the same
> > criteria for what is or isn't spammy content.
> you stopped premature reading my repsonse - WHY?
> look again at the "X-Spam-Status" header below
> a single mail sent
Am 26.03.2015 um 14:13 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:02:19 +0100
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Silent discard mail is mostly forbidden in the EU,
Is it? Could you perhaps point me to the EU directive stating this?
I'm sure there must be lots of qualifications
in germany 2 ye
On Thursday 26 March 2015 at 14:02:19 (EU time), Robert Schetterer wrote:
> Silent discard mail is mostly forbidden in the EU, but
> someone may do so with its own mail.
Does anyone here have any references to actual legislation, stating this?
I've seen several comments about this in this thread
Am 26.03.2015 um 14:04 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 13:54:45 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
1) Directed to multiple recipients...
the content is the same, reject it or not
That is a non-solution. You are assuming all users have the same
criteria for what is or isn't spammy co
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:02:19 +0100
Robert Schetterer wrote:
> Silent discard mail is mostly forbidden in the EU,
Is it? Could you perhaps point me to the EU directive stating this?
I'm sure there must be lots of qualifications.
Regards,
David.
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 13:54:45 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> > 1) Directed to multiple recipients...
> the content is the same, reject it or not
That is a non-solution. You are assuming all users have the same
criteria for what is or isn't spammy content.
> the same way you reject a mail with a
Am 26.03.2015 um 13:40 schrieb David F. Skoll:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:36:36 +0100
> Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> What make you think you have the right to put a mail for a different
>> person to /dev/null without reject it proper and so sender nor RCPT
>> are aware?
>
> People who sign up for ou
Am 26.03.2015 um 13:54 schrieb Reindl Harald:
Solve that problem, and then I agree with you. And saying "well, don't
let different end-users have different settings" is not a solution.
Neither is "tempfail all recipients but the first so the message
is transmitted one time for each recipient."
Am 26.03.2015 um 13:43 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 12:09:58 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
why in the world would a reject *before queue* trigger a backscatter
or bounce on my side?
How do you do before-queue rejection of a message that is...
1) Directed to multiple recipients
On 3/26/15, David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:36:36 +0100
> Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> What make you think you have the right to put a mail for a different
>> person to /dev/null without reject it proper and so sender nor RCPT
>> are aware?
>
> People who sign up for our service do so
On 3/26/15, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 26.03.2015 um 13:10 schrieb Nick Edwards:
>> On 3/26/15, Reindl Harald wrote:
bots have not learned from 55x messages EVER they dont care, they
never have they never will, they will resend their shit 50 times a
second without hesitation anyo
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 12:09:58 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> why in the world would a reject *before queue* trigger a backscatter
> or bounce on my side?
How do you do before-queue rejection of a message that is...
1) Directed to multiple recipients...
2) Some of which have different spam thresho
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:36:36 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> What make you think you have the right to put a mail for a different
> person to /dev/null without reject it proper and so sender nor RCPT
> are aware?
People who sign up for our service do so knowing that we sometimes
silently discard s
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:53:49 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> accepted means your SMTP sevrer responded with a 250 status code and
> not with a 4x temporary or 5x permanent error aka rejected the message
No. Accepted means delivered to the end-user's mailbox.
As an analogy: I do not believe the po
Am 26.03.2015 um 13:10 schrieb Nick Edwards:
On 3/26/15, Reindl Harald wrote:
bots have not learned from 55x messages EVER they dont care, they
never have they never will, they will resend their shit 50 times a
second without hesitation anyone whos been a mail admin for more than
5 years know
On 3/26/15, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 25.03.2015 um 14:56 schrieb Nick Edwards:
>>> if i need to take the phone and ask the admin if a mail was discarded or
>>> just not delivered at the moment the mailservice is shit
>>
>> get into the real world, and there you go again someone does different
>
Kevin,
On 26/03/15 11:18, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 3/26/2015 7:09 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
why in the world would a reject *before queue* trigger a backscatter
or bounce on my side?
To me, your recommend action makes you only worried about your tiny star
in the universe of mail servers and
>From: Reindl Harald
>been there short ago by receive 600 backscatters about messages i never sent
Hmmm. Maybe someone on this list was trying to send you a strong hint.
For the record, that wasn't me but it did sound like a good idea to prove
a point about backscatter.
Am 26.03.2015 um 12:18 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
For example, in the scenario where server A sends a virus to your server
B, my opinion is that I have a duty to act to protect the public at
large and go "this is a virus, send a dsn 200 and silently discard"
and send the DSN to the forged sende
On Thursday 26 March 2015 at 12:18:03 (EU time), Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> stop beating a dead horse, agree to disagree and let's move on.
Thanks :)
Antony.
--
I want to build a machine that will be proud of me.
- Danny Hillis, creator of The Connection Machine
On 3/26/2015 7:09 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
why in the world would a reject *before queue* trigger a backscatter
or bounce on my side?
To me, your recommend action makes you only worried about your tiny star
in the universe of mail servers and ignores the community responsibility
you have as a
Hello David,
Thursday, March 26, 2015, 10:56:36 AM, you wrote:
DJ> I have never had customer ask to release a message that scored 2x
DJ> above our block threshold or had a virus so these are definitely safe to
silent
DJ> discard as long as local laws allow it.
Quite, and we can and do vary the
Am 26.03.2015 um 11:58 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
On 3/26/2015 6:20 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
and everybody acting that way for mails which are not only his own
should refrain from maintain a mailserver because he is playing
lottery with other peolles communication
You are inherently entitled
Am 26.03.2015 um 11:56 schrieb David Jones:
From: Reindl Harald
And that is a silent discard. You are accepting responsibility for the
email, telling no one anything more and discarding it with out DSN/NDR
and everybody acting that way for mails which are not only his own
should refrain fr
On 3/26/2015 6:56 AM, David Jones wrote:
I do have the
occasional false positive but we quarantine everything and can release it as
needed. I have never had customer ask to release a message that scored 2x
above our block threshold or had a virus so these are definitely safe to silent
discard
On 3/26/2015 6:20 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
and everybody acting that way for mails which are not only his own
should refrain from maintain a mailserver because he is playing
lottery with other peolles communication
You are inherently entitled to your opinion but we will have to agree to
dis
>
>From: Reindl Harald
>Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 5:20 AM
>To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Spamassassin not catching spam (Follow-up)
>Am 26.03.2015 um 11:17 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
>> On 3/26/2015 2:53 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>
>>
On Thursday 26 March 2015 at 11:36:36 (EU time), Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 26.03.2015 um 11:27 schrieb Niamh Holding:
> > Hello Reindl,
> >
> > Thursday, March 26, 2015, 10:20:15 AM, you wrote:
> >
> > What make you think you have the right to tell me what's appropriate in
> > our setup?
> >
>
Am 26.03.2015 um 11:27 schrieb Niamh Holding:
Hello Reindl,
Thursday, March 26, 2015, 10:20:15 AM, you wrote:
RH> and everybody acting that way for mails which are not only his own
RH> should refrain from maintain a mailserver because he is playing lottery
RH> with other peolles communication
On 03/26/2015 11:27 AM, Niamh Holding wrote:
Hello Reindl,
Thursday, March 26, 2015, 10:20:15 AM, you wrote:
RH> and everybody acting that way for mails which are not only his own
RH> should refrain from maintain a mailserver because he is playing lottery
RH> with other peolles communication
Hello Reindl,
Thursday, March 26, 2015, 10:20:15 AM, you wrote:
RH> and everybody acting that way for mails which are not only his own
RH> should refrain from maintain a mailserver because he is playing lottery
RH> with other peolles communication
What make you think you have the right to tel
Am 26.03.2015 um 11:17 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
On 3/26/2015 2:53 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 26.03.2015 um 01:25 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:08:34 -0600
"@lbutlr" wrote:
You can reject who you want in Germany too, you just can___t delete a
message that you___ve already
On 3/26/2015 2:53 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 26.03.2015 um 01:25 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:08:34 -0600
"@lbutlr" wrote:
You can reject who you want in Germany too, you just can___t delete a
message that you___ve already accepted.
What does "accepted" mean? Redirecting
88 matches
Mail list logo
