On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 05:44:11PM -0700, Dan Hitt wrote: > On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 4:50 PM Greg Wooledge <g...@wooledge.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 16:33:38 -0700, Dan Hitt wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 3:09 AM <to...@tuxteam.de> wrote: > > > > if you want to do everyone a favour, you bounce the original message > > > > to <report-lists...@lists.debian.org> to help the list spam team train > > > > their filters (I did). > > > > > This like sounds like good and important advice, but how do you "bounce > > the > > > original message"?
[...] > Thanks so much Greg for your detailed reply and explanation. (Thanks also > Alain for your remarks on agents and bouncing.) > > So for now i'll just continue to refrain from responding to spam, and if i > change mailing systems or gmail gets a bounce feature i'll try bouncing. I tried asking a search engine how to bounce mails from gmail, since I don't have an account with them. The results are... mixed, alas. Some offer bouncing back "to sender" (which with spam is *ALWAYS* a very bad idea!), some say the option is only available in the paid version (this feels kind of right for G). Whatever. I'd say the g in gmail stands i for "garbage" (not that hotmail and its ilk were any better, mind you). My take is that the Big Ones conspire (consciously or unconsciously) to make mail less useful. Poison the well to sell bottled water. Cheers -- t
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
