Am 2005-01-16 20:22:06, schrieb Mathieu Roy:
> Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> tapota :
> > $USER are not criminalized, they are protected by DUL-SPAMers
>
> In the name of protection, we can implement whatever crap (SPF,
> Patriot Act, that's criminalization in the name of protection).
Tod
Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> tapota :
> Note: I am not maintainer of this package.
>
> Am 2005-01-16 17:28:02, schrieb Mathieu Roy:
>>
>> >People with dynamic IPs are free to run servers. However, it has
>> >proven to be a spam sign.
>>
>> How so? Any statistics on false positive of t
Note: I am not maintainer of this package.
Am 2005-01-16 17:28:02, schrieb Mathieu Roy:
>
> >People with dynamic IPs are free to run servers. However, it has
> >proven to be a spam sign.
>
> How so? Any statistics on false positive of this test?
Now I am working sinc 03/1999 with Debian and
>People with dynamic IPs are free to run servers. However, it has
>proven to be a spam sign.
How so? Any statistics on false positive of this test?
>What users SHOULD do, is run their own server, but route their mail
>through their ISP's SMTP server. (exim smarthost)
So you are saying that De
4 matches
Mail list logo
