* Michael Bell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > I will note that they are poorly organized, with the headers hand > edited, and useful things like the RECEIVED headers removed. Hence > all DNS stuff wasn't worth running. Plus I'm dubious about what > they've done to the formattting,etc.
If what your saying is correct, and they've done a lot of editing to these emails, are they reliable to test against? Wouldn't (excus e the term) virgin spam be more approporiate to test against? Or are the things they've changed irrelivant? -- Matthew Davis http://dogpound.vnet.net/ ---------------------------------------------------------------- You forgot to do your backup 16 days ago. Tomorrow you'll need that version. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Saturday, November 30, 2002 / 12:21AM ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Get the new Palm Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0002en _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
