On Mon, 13 Jan 2014, Amir Caspi wrote:
On Dec 28, 2013, at 9:08 PM, John Hardin wrote:
Yes, I definitely noticed that. As you can see from the spample (link
below), none of the above rules are hitting properly; the To: line is a
bare email, not properly angle-bracketed. Or, if any of the ru
On Dec 28, 2013, at 9:08 PM, John Hardin wrote:
>> Yes, I definitely noticed that. As you can see from the spample (link
>> below), none of the above rules are hitting properly; the To: line is a
>> bare email, not properly angle-bracketed. Or, if any of the rules are
>> hitting, the meta rule
Amir 'CG' Caspi wrote:
> Spample:
> http://pastebin.com/0jEMBA1X
>
> The other unfortunate thing is that this SHOULD have popped
> HTML_COMMENT_GIBBERISH (my own home-baked version since there's not a
> public one), but it didn't pop that one either. Of course, as I have
> posted previously, I've
On Sat, 28 Dec 2013, Amir 'CG' Caspi wrote:
On Sat, December 28, 2013 7:57 pm, John Hardin wrote:
And in case you actually did mean From: rather than recipient address...
Sorry, no, I meant To: as you surmised.
Unfortunately __SUBJ_HAS_TO_1 isn't performing well enough against the
current m
On Sat, December 28, 2013 7:57 pm, John Hardin wrote:
> And in case you actually did mean From: rather than recipient address...
Sorry, no, I meant To: as you surmised.
> Unfortunately __SUBJ_HAS_TO_1 isn't performing well enough against the
> current masscheck corpora to be published. It's possi
+]+@(?:[A-Za-z0-9]+\.)+[A-Za-z]{3,5}/
i.e. something that will match a valid email address in the subject line.
However, I'm specifically wanting to match this to the recipient email
address, i.e. not just ANY email address in the subject line, but the same
one that's in the From: line. (T
5}/
>
> i.e. something that will match a valid email address in the subject line.
> However, I'm specifically wanting to match this to the recipient email
> address, i.e. not just ANY email address in the subject line, but the same
> one that's in the From: line. (This latter,
it gets.
I did check... unless I'm completely blind, I don't see it. I'm basically
looking for something like:
header EMAIL_IN_SUBJ Subject =~
/[A-Za-z0-9.-_+]+@(?:[A-Za-z0-9]+\.)+[A-Za-z]{3,5}/
i.e. something that will match a valid email address in the subject line.
Howe
On 12/23/2013 09:32 PM, Amir 'CG' Caspi wrote:
<..sniipped..>
Anyone have any idea which rules are supposed to hit for this, and why
they may not be working? At least for me and my users, basically no
legitimate email ever includes the email address in the subject line (body
Hi all,
Over the past couple of days I've been getting slammed with spams that
have subjects of the form:
Subject: spammy subject line
That is, the recipient's email address is included explicitly in angular
brackets at the beginning of the subject line. These are new and "vari
On Tue, 2011-08-16 at 22:29 +0930, Rodney Baker wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 05:02:20 John Hardin wrote:
> > Just as a test, if you comment that bit out of your personal .procmailrc
> > does everything work they way you'd expect (i.e. one SA pass, the correct
> > score in the X- headers)?
>
> Yep
On 8/16/2011 8:55 AM, Rodney Baker wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 07:36:05 Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
>
>> After you fixed your mail processing chain to not have SA chew twice on
>> the spam -- you should manually train Bayes, feeding it a lot of hand
>> classified spam, and possibly ham. Check your
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 05:02:20 John Hardin wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, Rodney Baker wrote:
> > :0fw: spamassassin.lock
> > :
> > | spamc
>
> Just as a test, if you comment that bit out of your personal .procmailrc
> does everything work they way you'd expect (i.e. one SA pass, the correct
>
>
> > > > I'm attempting to filter on the modified subject line (which for some
> > > > reason isn't working - that rule never seems to match and spam never
> > > > gets moved into the Spam folder, even though I've tested the regex
> > &g
On Tue, 2011-08-16 at 01:07 +0930, Rodney Baker wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 00:48:13 Bowie Bailey wrote:
> > >* ^Subject.*SPAM\([0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]\).*
> > >$HOME/Maildir/.Spam//
> > >
> > > I'm attempting to filter on the modified subject lin
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, Rodney Baker wrote:
:0fw: spamassassin.lock
| spamc
Just as a test, if you comment that bit out of your personal .procmailrc
does everything work they way you'd expect (i.e. one SA pass, the correct
score in the X- headers)?
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 01:15:11 Walter Hurry wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 11:18:13 -0400, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> > On 8/15/2011 10:57 AM, Rodney Baker wrote:
>
>
> >>:0
> >>
> >>* ^Subject.*SPAM\([0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]\).* $HOME/Maildir/.Spam//
>
>
>
> > This message is going through SA twi
On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 11:18:13 -0400, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> On 8/15/2011 10:57 AM, Rodney Baker wrote:
>>:0
>>* ^Subject.*SPAM\([0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]\).* $HOME/Maildir/.Spam//
> This message is going through SA twice.
Indeed. And by the way, for what it is worth, my .procmailrc says (inter
a
*SPAM\([0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]\).*
> >$HOME/Maildir/.Spam//
> >
> > I'm attempting to filter on the modified subject line (which for some
> > reason isn't working - that rule never seems to match and spam never
> > gets moved into the Spam folder, even though I'
begins
> thus:
>
>LOGFILE=$HOME/pm.log
>
>:0fw: spamassassin.lock
>| spamc
>
>
>:0
>* ^Subject.*SPAM\([0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]\).*
>$HOME/Maildir/.Spam//
>
> I'm attempting to filter on the modified subject line (which for some reason
>
.lock
| spamc
:0
* ^Subject.*SPAM\([0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]\).*
$HOME/Maildir/.Spam//
I'm attempting to filter on the modified subject line (which for some reason
isn't working - that rule never seems to match and spam never gets moved into
the Spam folder, even though I'
nathang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to setup an email account in cPanel so that I receive *all*
> incoming emails that contain a specific word in the subject line.
>
> It would be critical that I get 100% of the emails sent to me (that contain
> a specific word in the subje
nathang wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to setup an email account in cPanel so that I receive *all*
incoming emails that contain a specific word in the subject line.
It would be critical that I get 100% of the emails sent to me (that contain
a specific word in the subject line), and that none of the
Hi,
I'd like to setup an email account in cPanel so that I receive *all*
incoming emails that contain a specific word in the subject line.
It would be critical that I get 100% of the emails sent to me (that contain
a specific word in the subject line), and that none of them get trapped
On 04.08.08 11:47, Rob Sharp wrote:
> Thanks for the reply.
>
> Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
> >>All messages that SA determines as spammy has [SPAM] prefixed to the
> >>subject line.
> >
> >there's header rewriting set up somwehere.
>
>
Thanks for the reply.
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
All messages that SA determines as spammy has [SPAM] prefixed to the
subject line.
there's header rewriting set up somwehere.
My Host just told me to add "rewrite_subject 0" into my user_prefs. I
think they actually mean
On 02.08.08 23:31, Rob Sharp wrote:
> I have an email account on a shared server at Hostgator. I have
> configured SpamAssassin via their Cpanel interface not to rewrite the
> subject line when flagging an item as spam. However, this flagging still
> seems to be happening.
>
Evening all,
I have an email account on a shared server at Hostgator. I have
configured SpamAssassin via their Cpanel interface not to rewrite the
subject line when flagging an item as spam. However, this flagging still
seems to be happening.
All messages that SA determines as spammy has
Am 2008-02-25 15:56:50, schrieb fchan:
> Hi,
> I'm get alot of these February 77% OFF or variations (ie January 73%
> OFF and my guess March 75% OFF next month) thereof in the subject
> line for spam. The body always changes so I can't really key on this.
> I wou
Which brings up the question, why are you having problems catching it?
Have you whitelisted youreself with whitelist_from. Most of these I see
score around 20 or more.
I've recently found it convenient to add a regex that is closer to
blacklisting myself, since I generally don't send mail to m
month to month and the percentages change but the format
remains the same for the subject line. The body uses legitimate text
taken from various webpages and have phishing link which also varies.
The sender is "me" but the Return-Path is the same name at different
domain.
I trie
On 26/02/2008 3:21 PM, fchan wrote:
> Hi,
> Thank you Loren Wilton. I think this is best solution for me.
> These are not from Kohl's or any other legitimate company. The subject
> changes from month to month and the percentages change but the format
> remains the same for t
Hi,
Thank you Loren Wilton. I think this is best solution for me.
These are not from Kohl's or any other legitimate company. The
subject changes from month to month and the percentages change but
the format remains the same for the subject line. The body uses
legitimate text taken
fchan wrote:
> I'm get alot of these February 77% OFF or variations (ie January 73%
> OFF and my guess March 75% OFF next month) thereof in the subject
> line for spam.
Is that from Kohls? I have been annoyed with their spam quite a bit
lately. But I wouldn't block bas
I'm get alot of these February 77% OFF or variations (ie January 73% OFF
and my guess March 75% OFF next month) thereof in the subject line for
spam. The body always changes so I can't really key on this. I would like
to make rule that subject line filter this type of spam.
I have
Hi,
I'm get alot of these February 77% OFF or variations (ie January 73%
OFF and my guess March 75% OFF next month) thereof in the subject
line for spam. The body always changes so I can't really key on this.
I would like to make rule that subject line filter this type of spam.
Th
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007, Clay Davis wrote:
Am I hurting my Bayes db by training it with HAM that has the text "(spam)" in
the subject line of the message?
IMHO not. A word "spam" in not the most significiant spam fingerprint.
Tell me the truth - how many spams have you se
Am I hurting my Bayes db by training it with HAM that has the text "(spam)" in
the subject line of the message?
Thanks,
Clay
apc wrote:
>
> Dan Barker wrote:
>
>> Well, this works here.
>>
>> whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] yahoo.com
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Thanks! I have added that; I am sure it will works if it works for you.
>
>
Generally this works because SA honors the "Return-Path" header as an
a
on. Then I
> realized that inside you were just a pitiful child. But
> now I realize that outside that child is just a big pompous buffoon."
> -Leela
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Subject-Line-Not-changing-tf3500983.html#a9783401
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 05:49:24AM -0700, dougp23 wrote:
> #Change the subject of suspected spam
> rewrite_header_subject***SPAM***
It's:
rewrite_header Subject ...
not:
rewrite_header_subject ...
"perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf" :)
--
Randomly Selected Tagline:
"Y'know, Zap, onc
Dan Barker wrote:
>
> Well, this works here.
>
> whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] yahoo.com
>
> Dan
>
>
>
Thanks! I have added that; I am sure it will works if it works for you.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Whitelisting-
Well, this works here.
whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] yahoo.com
Dan
-Original Message-
From: apc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 10:18 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: Whitelisting subject line
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
>
>
>
sting every member of the
group which isn't practical.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Whitelisting-subject-line-tf3501030.html#a9778120
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
From: apc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sun 4/1/2007 9:05
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Whitelisting subject line
Hi,
I have been a Linux tech for many years, and now I want to get the most out
of Spam Assassin. My email address has been around
/Whitelisting-subject-line-tf3501030.html#a9777570
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
as to why my subject lines are not being rewritten??? Spamd
version 3.0.6
Much thanks to anyone willing to help!!
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Subject-Line-Not-changing-tf3500983.html#a9777427
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
ail as spam and modifies the subject line, is it
possible for it to also modify any swear words (offensive language)
that maybe
in the subject line? Maybe replace them with astericks.
You'd have to modify the code, where you can do anything you want. :)
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"
On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 03:11:53PM -0500, Rick Page wrote:
> When SpamAssassin tags an email as spam and modifies the subject line, is it
> possible for it to also modify any swear words (offensive language) that maybe
> in the subject line? Maybe replace them with astericks.
You'd
Dear Users,
When SpamAssassin tags an email as spam and modifies the subject line, is it
possible for it to also modify any swear words (offensive language) that maybe
in the subject line? Maybe replace them with astericks.
Rick Page
Page Hosting 4U, LLC
888-256-7445
I'm a little confused on what you are reporting here, but I *think* you are
saying:
aYou are using 2.64
bThe mail doesn't have a Subject line
cThe mail is spam
dThe subject isn't getting tagged with [spam].
eYou are using qmail
If that is right, I think the
SA 2.64 w/ qmail-scanner. Messages w/ no subject and no body are being
detected as spam (message header info is normal, some score as high as
9.1 (threshold @ 5)), but it's not being rejected, and the ones that
should be let through, albeit with a [SPAM] tag on the subject line, are
not
Slightly off topic but does Sendmail 8.12 add a subject when one is not
present?
Matt Kettler wrote:
> Russell P. Sutherland wrote:
>
>> Is there a test that one can construct that would
>> assign a weight to a message that is missing
>> a certain header, completely
Russell P. Sutherland wrote:
Is there a test that one can construct that would
assign a weight to a message that is missing
a certain header, completely? In my case, no Subject
line at all.
From the default ruleset for 3.x:
header __HAS_SUBJECT exists:Subject
meta MISSING_SUBJECT
Is there a test that one can construct that would
assign a weight to a message that is missing
a certain header, completely? In my case, no Subject
line at all.
--
Quist ConsultingEmail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
219 Donlea DriveVoice: +1.416.696.7600
Toronto ON M4G 2N1
subject line spam
Hello,
We're seeing quite a few spam emails with subject lines similar to the
below...
"Better st0ck perfOrmance fr0m 0tc helpline"
Does anyone have a rule for these yet?
--
Regards,
Matt
> > "Better st0ck perfOrmance fr0m 0tc helpline"
> >
> > Does anyone have a rule for these yet?
>
> There are rules for those, however, they only seem to exist for the body.
> Mangled, Chickpox and SARE_adult all hit on that line.
But keep in mind that body rules also get fed the Subject, so they
> Hello,
>
> We're seeing quite a few spam emails with subject lines
> similar to the below...
>
> "Better st0ck perfOrmance fr0m 0tc helpline"
>
> Does anyone have a rule for these yet?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Matt
>
There are rules for those, however, they only seem t
Hello,
We're seeing quite a few spam emails with subject lines similar to the
below...
"Better st0ck perfOrmance fr0m 0tc helpline"
Does anyone have a rule for these yet?
--
Regards,
Matt
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3816
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3605
>>> "Dallas L. Engelken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 10/3/2004
11:13:35 AM >>>> > Is there a way to force a subject line
to be inserted if > ther
Daniel M. Drucker wrote:
> Is there a way to force a subject line to be inserted if there isn't
> one already?
Procmail will do it. Here is a rule to add one if none exist already.
:0 fhw
* ^To: *$
| formail -I "To: undisclosed-recipients"
Bob
>
> Is there a way to force a subject line to be inserted if
> there isn't one already?
>
Search bugzilla.. I sent a quick patch for SA3.0 to add a empty Subject:
header when the subject header was missing from an email. I'd send you
the bug #, but I'm t
then delete it.
Even lowly outlook express can handle this :).
-joe
On Sunday 03 October 2004 08:47 am, Daniel M. Drucker wrote:
> A lot of my users are having problems with spam not getting filtered
> out of their mailboxes due to those spams not having subject lines. If
> there
A lot of my users are having problems with spam not getting filtered
out of their mailboxes due to those spams not having subject lines. If
there's no subject line, the subject line doesn't get rewritten with
rewrite_header.
Many or most of them are using email software that doesn'
Greetings
all!
I have just put my
Postfix/Spamassassin/Solaris9 server into production an hour ago, and I am
loving the results. I have one issue where SpamAssassin is not modifying
my subject line. This is important because rules on the client detect the
modification to put the spam
Jeff Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I certainly agree with a simple [SA} prefix so that the SA emails
> don't get lost and deleted with all the other stuff I get. However,
> this came up a few months ago and the SA list nazis decided that we
> must be too stupid not to have programmed our email
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 4:10 AM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Subject line
>
>
> Dave Goodrich wrote:
> > I was non committal on the whole subject w
Dave Goodrich wrote:
> I was non committal on the whole subject when this started. I tend to
> disagree with militant list nazis regardless of the topic or the view
> they put forth.
This is the second time in this thread that Nazis have been mentioned.
I hereby invoke Godwin's Law and declare t
Quoting Michael Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
"I see!" said the blind man as he picked up his hammer and saw...
I forgot the word "Subject" in that line.
Not only that, but the line above it
rewrite_subject 1
should be removed as it does nothing anymore.
-Jim
; I just installed SA 3.0 RC5 on my test server. The problem is, the
> subject line is not being modified even though all the other headers
are
> there.
>
> What did I miss?
>
> Here's the lines from my local.cf.
>
> Thanx!
>
> -Michael
>
> always_add
Michael Weber wrote:
{You know, if you send them the headers it might be helpful!}
Sorry.
always_add_headers 1
report_safe 0
rewrite_subject 1
rewrite_header %%SPAM%%% (_SCORE_)
dns_available yes
subject_tag %%SPAM%%% (_SCORE_)
use_terse_rep
On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 02:27:29PM -0500, Michael Weber wrote:
> I just installed SA 3.0 RC5 on my test server. The problem is, the
> subject line is not being modified even though all the other headers are
> there.
>
> What did I miss?
>
> Here's the lines from
ber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 09/15/04 02:27PM >>>
I just installed SA 3.0 RC5 on my test server. The problem is, the
subject line is not being modified even though all the other headers
are
there.
What did I miss?
Here's the lines from my local.cf.
Thanx!
-Michael
I just installed SA 3.0 RC5 on my test server. The problem is, the
subject line is not being modified even though all the other headers are
there.
What did I miss?
Here's the lines from my local.cf.
Thanx!
-Michael
always_add_headers 1
report_safe 0
rewrite_su
> -Original Message-
> From: Kenneth Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 4:51 PM
> To: SpamAssassin Discussion
> Subject: RE: Subject line
>
>
> --On Tuesday, September 14, 2004 2:14 PM -0700 Bret Miller
> <[EMAIL P
In case people have been ignoring the Subject Line thread, I wanted to
really make sure people had a look at this post. I use the example below for
many things. When I write a particularly interesting SARE rule I am testing,
I will have procmail/formail tag the subject if the rule hits. This way I
Quoting Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
At 08:40 PM 9/14/2004, Jim Maul wrote:
> Good letter. Procmail is a wonder if we take the time to learn it.
>
Sure, great, i'd love to take the time to learn it...except that my
installation
doesnt use procmail at all. Any other ideas for all the people
Jim Maul wrote:
Quoting Ralf Hildebrandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
* Michele Neylon::Blacknight Solutions <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Why is List-Id not sufficient?
It's only visible if you examine the header. Something in the subject
line is a lot more visual
Pssst: "Subject:&quo
d upon the subject line.
Well, I, and apparently a few others, get far too many mailing-list
messages to want to try to handle them all in a single inbox. Since
I'm using Cyrus IMAP, I have sieve delivery-time filtering to easily
sort them into a variety of IMAP submailboxes. And I use Mulberry,
Hey, it's legal for ISP's to read your email so why not filter it as well!
Just my $0.02.
From: mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 9/14/2004 7:05 PM
To: Satya
Cc: SpamAssassin list
Subject: Re: [SidePost] Re: [TopPost] RE: [SA-LIST] RE: Su
Hey, what is wrong with using rules to sort sa list mail? All my sa
mail goes to a spamassassin folder, done.
-Jim
-Original Message-
From: Jim Maul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 4:27 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Subject line
Quoting
Since this thread is so wack...
I was at volunteer call for the austin city limits festival and 6 or
seven people said that the emails from the coordinators were getting
caught in the isps spamfilters and they never recieved them. I asked if
they werent just in the spam bucket or whatever and they
CTED]
Sent: Tue 9/14/2004 5:02 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: [TopPost] RE: [SA-LIST] RE: Subject line
Like dirt nap gone? In that case nevermind.
At 08:40 PM 9/14/2004, Jim Maul wrote:
> Good letter. Procmail is a wonder if we take the time to learn it.
>
Sure, great, i'd love to take the time to learn it...except that my
installation
doesnt use procmail at all. Any other ideas for all the people in the
same boat
as me?
What do you use f
Quoting Satya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
IDSPISPOPD (that's "no clipping" in Doom)
oh the good ole days...
(and remember, there's a side-post down there)
On Sep 14, 2004 at 16:16, Chris Santerre wrote:
I figured is you were gonna start another group flame war, we should do it
correctly.
You forgot >1
Quoting Raquel Rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 18:15:21 -0400
Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You can choose to implement it in
procmail locally, it's quite easy.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.general/40735/match=subject+prefix+new+list
The fundamental
Quoting "Dan Mahoney, System Admin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004, Kelson wrote:
Trust me, I've dated a girl who liked anime and spoke in nothing but
leetspeak and broken japanese. It sounds cute until you get a PHONE CALL
asking "when will B teh Gushi home 4 dinn0rz".
Can i have her nu
isplays, and every pixel is precious. I also wonder what text-to-speech
>processing does with subject line decoration.
I read mine in an 80x2[45] ssh terminal.
(Anyone inviting me to change the terminal size or get a bigger screen
is invited to a) smeg off b) give me the money for the bi
ns to JayZ.
>9) Guns kill people, not puppies.
>10) Jello shouldn't be a food.
>
>Now THATS how you start a flame war!!! Woot! :-)
>
>--Chris
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Carnegie, Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004
On Sep 14, 2004 at 12:15, Predrag Lezaic wrote:
>Would it be possible to have emails to this list have something such as
>"[SA-LIST} Subject here" in the subject line for easier sorting of the
>emails in folders? This is actually the first list am using that
>doesn't
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 18:15:21 -0400
Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You can choose to implement it in
> procmail locally, it's quite easy.
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.general/40735/match=subject+prefix+new+list
>
> The fundamental points against implementi
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004, Bret Miller wrote:
Anyway, I didn't ask for the subject tag. Was merely answering a
question of how it would help someone. Again, it's obvious to me that
there are way to many people against it here to even bother. You might
as well try to convince Mac users that PCs are better
> > Which then means I have to keep track of a dozen folders, which is
> > something I don't need to do for the very few messages on
> this list that
> > are even remotely relevant.
>
> How do you determine relevance? When I open my SA Users folder in the
> morning, it typically has a 100 messages
At 05:00 PM 9/14/2004, Michele Neylon::Blacknight Solutions wrote:
I don't always use evolution and even if I did I would still prefer
something in the subject line
As I already said, other lists allow people to choose.
The Apache list allows you to choose.. You can choose to implement
--On Tuesday, September 14, 2004 3:06 PM -0700 Pat Lashley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It can be a problem for people with limited display space for
the Subject: line. The significant part can be pushed right
off the edge.
I suspect a lot of people don't recognize this issue becaus
On Tue, 2004-09-14 at 14:53 -0700, Kenneth Porter wrote:
> --On Tuesday, September 14, 2004 10:00 PM +0100 "Michele Neylon::Blacknight
> Solutions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As I already said, other lists allow people to choose.
>
> What list software (including version) do those lists us
On Tue, 2004-09-14 at 14:53 -0700, Kenneth Porter wrote:
> --On Tuesday, September 14, 2004 10:00 PM +0100 "Michele Neylon::Blacknight
> Solutions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As I already said, other lists allow people to choose.
>
> What list software (including version) do those lists us
--On Tuesday, September 14, 2004 5:09 PM -0400 Jim Maul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
If someone replies to a message i sent to the list, and they happen to
hit "reply-all" both the list and i will get a copy. Filtering on listid
will send 1 to the list box i have set up and 1 copy to my inbox. Fi
longer. while this is true, i hardly believe it to be
a reason not to have it.
It can be a problem for people with limited display space for
the Subject: line. The significant part can be pushed right
off the edge.
It can also be a problem for the 'Re' prefixing. I've seen
messa
--On Tuesday, September 14, 2004 2:57 PM -0700 Bret Miller
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Which then means I have to keep track of a dozen folders, which is
something I don't need to do for the very few messages on this list that
are even remotely relevant.
How do you determine relevance? When I open
1 - 100 of 140 matches
Mail list logo
