On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 08:36 -0700, R-Elists wrote: > > > > But this is all *OT* and has no relevance to SA. Why this > > list was spammed with an unscientific spin of a claim in the > > first instance just shows the dark hand of Barracuda at work. > > > > > > > > Richard, > > i imagine you are far more knowledgable than me (and others) in most > respects re: spam filtering and many other things... > > :-) > > yet.... possibly, could you write up the factual stuff inside you re: your > former employer that is appropriate for public consumption and post it on a > webpage instead??? > > ...and put that url as part of your SIG please? > > then it might keep the beating the doody out of the dead spam filtering > appliance "horsey" stuff verbosity of it off the list??? > > ill bet with all that energy you could have developed several things and > made another fortune by now eh? > > :-) > > - rh > No. Here is why. When someone posts a Barracuda send-up that is questionable, it will still end up in the archives. It is, therefore, relevant that any counter argument and supporting material be archived with it for balance. My follow ups have been entirely within the context of the post.
As for the childish remarks about my fortune. I'm sat at home without the need to work, and you are....? Perhaps if you are interested in the workings of the Barracuda this may be of interest to you: http://www.waraxe.us/ftopict-5340-barracuda.html Let me know if there is anything else I can help you with. I have *plenty* of time and energy ;-)
