> -Original Message-
> From: rich...@buzzhost.co.uk [mailto:rich...@buzzhost.co.uk]
> Sent: Wednesday, 28 October 2009 3:00 a.m.
> Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Geocities closed
>
> I just found this one working:
>
> http://uk
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Cardwell [mailto:spamassassin-us...@lists.grepular.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, 27 October 2009 11:54 p.m.
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Geocities closed
>
> Alex wrote:
>
> > Thought I would pass along tha
Alex wrote:
Anyone have an existing account that they could try to access today,
and try and send/receive an email? There isn't much on the page
detailing what happens to all their data outside of creating a new
Yahoo profile or site.
They're not getting rid of email accounts, just web:
http://
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
I just found this one working:
http://uk.geocities.com/midsomerland/midsomerland_indexone.htm
so providence would suggest leaving things alone.
Yes, if you go to the Yahoo FAQ on the close-down, you will find that
one option available prior to
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 13:59 +, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
> I just found this one working:
>
> http://uk.geocities.com/midsomerland/midsomerland_indexone.htm
>
> so providence would suggest leaving things alone.
The domains still exist. www.geocities.com and uk.geocities.com both
redirect
I just found this one working:
http://uk.geocities.com/midsomerland/midsomerland_indexone.htm
so providence would suggest leaving things alone.
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 05:08:20 -0600
LuKreme wrote:
> On 27-Oct-2009, at 04:53, Mike Cardwell wrote:
> > Why have any geocities specific rules any more if geocities
> > doesn't exist? It's not as if spammers can host their websites on
> > geocities anymore so there's no reason why a spammer would i
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 05:50 -0700, John Rudd wrote:
You're assuming that spammers will perfectly update all existing spam.
There might be crud floating around out there for a while to come.
On 27.10.09 13:06, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
I'm not
> On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 05:50 -0700, John Rudd wrote:
> > You're assuming that spammers will perfectly update all existing spam.
> > There might be crud floating around out there for a while to come.
On 27.10.09 13:06, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
> I'm not assuming anything John. Spam with no e
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 06:06, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk
wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 05:50 -0700, John Rudd wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 05:42, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 05:08 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
>> >> On 27-Oct-2009, at 04:53, Mike Cardwell wrote:
>> >> >
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 05:50 -0700, John Rudd wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 05:42, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 05:08 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> >> On 27-Oct-2009, at 04:53, Mike Cardwell wrote:
> >> > Why have any geocities specific rules any more if geocities doesn't
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 05:42, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk
wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 05:08 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
>> On 27-Oct-2009, at 04:53, Mike Cardwell wrote:
>> > Why have any geocities specific rules any more if geocities doesn't
>> > exist? It's not as if spammers can host their websites on
On 27-Oct-2009, at 06:42, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 05:08 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
On 27-Oct-2009, at 04:53, Mike Cardwell wrote:
Why have any geocities specific rules any more if geocities doesn't
exist? It's not as if spammers can host their websites on geocities
anymor
rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 05:08 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
On 27-Oct-2009, at 04:53, Mike Cardwell wrote:
Why have any geocities specific rules any more if geocities doesn't
exist? It's not as if spammers can host their websites on geocities
anymore so there's no reason
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 05:08 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> On 27-Oct-2009, at 04:53, Mike Cardwell wrote:
> > Why have any geocities specific rules any more if geocities doesn't
> > exist? It's not as if spammers can host their websites on geocities
> > anymore so there's no reason why a spammer would
On 27-Oct-2009, at 04:53, Mike Cardwell wrote:
Why have any geocities specific rules any more if geocities doesn't
exist? It's not as if spammers can host their websites on geocities
anymore so there's no reason why a spammer would include a geocities
url in their spam. May as well just dele
Alex wrote:
Thought I would pass along that geocities closed up and went home today:
http://geocities.yahoo.com/
Wondering what this means in terms of the geocities SA rules? Would
sure be nice to just block them outright at the gateway, but in
From/To header and body, no?
Why have any geoci
Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 19:15 -0400, Alex wrote:
There isn't much on the page detailing what happens to all their data
outside of creating a new Yahoo profile or site.
According to a story in The Register, Yahoo couldn't care less about the
remaining data on the servers an
On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 19:15 -0400, Alex wrote:
>
> There isn't much on the page detailing what happens to all their data
> outside of creating a new Yahoo profile or site.
>
According to a story in The Register, Yahoo couldn't care less about the
remaining data on the servers and have wiped the Ge
19 matches
Mail list logo
