Pigeon said:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 03:09:57PM -0700, Lucas Albers wrote:
>> Would be nice to have your address munged from this list, or the option.
>
> You do have the option. Add to /etc/exim/exim.conf:
All the spam comes from other machine.
I reject 99% of it anyway, I just see it on my rej
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 01:35:41PM -0600, John Foster wrote:
> I have an idea!
> Why don't we figure out a way to bounce all the virus crap to the spammers.
> That would kill two bad birds with one big stone:-)
Hehehe, feed the homeless to the hungry,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 12:49:55AM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> >Actually, the most daunting thing about this list is the sheer volume
> >of mail involved.
>
> Do you even grasp the irony of this statement? If volume is a prob
Pigeon wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]"${if match {$header_to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]" frFs
...or other similar methods, depending on what email software you're using.
Hmmm, never thought of that for people who insist on sending CCs to messages
on lists which e
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 03:09:57PM -0700, Lucas Albers wrote:
> Would be nice to have your address munged from this list, or the option.
You do have the option. Add to /etc/exim/exim.conf:
##
# REWRITE CONFIG
Pigeon said:
> There was a lot of gas generated about the swen worm when that hit. That
> harvested email addresses off the web. Again, clueless Windows users
> without
> effective virus protection - only a wider base of them, ie. not just ones
> subscribed to this list.
> My solution is - for th
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 10:13:18PM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> >Long story short: [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not the only way
> >this forum is read: Other mailing lists mirror this one, as well as
> >several usenet newsgroup. Closing the list would severely limit
> >debian-user's us
I have an idea!
Why don't we figure out a way to bounce all the virus crap to the spammers.
That would kill two bad birds with one big stone:-)
--
John Foster
Advance-Computing Systems
We build amazing servers!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troubl
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 12:59:06PM -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
> Does this mean that the volunteer list maintainer who has limited time
> to maintain the list is a Debian Developer,
Yes.
> I am under the impression that recently there is NO maintenance of
> this list, judging by the amount of
Dan Lawrence wrote:
On 28 Jan 2004, "Bojan Baros" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
linux.debian.user:
If (wo)manpwer is the issue, I'd be happy to help with the admin
process. List admin, please feel free to email me directly to
discuss this.
-Dan
I would also be happy to volunteer with the admi
Paul Johnson wrote:
Actually, the most daunting thing about this list is the sheer volume
of mail involved.
Do you even grasp the irony of this statement? If volume is a problem
then you'd think reducing the volume by cutting out the cruft of non-list spam
and bogus mailings of false virus r
On 28 Jan 2004, "Bojan Baros" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
linux.debian.user:
> Why isn't there a limitation that will only allow the mails to be
> forwarded to the list if the originating email is subscribed to the
> list?
(snip)
I read the list on usenet. I find it is easier for me to follow
Paul Johnson wrote:
Long story short: [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not the only way
this forum is read: Other mailing lists mirror this one, as well as
several usenet newsgroup. Closing the list would severely limit
debian-user's usefulness due to a suddenly and artificially restricted
membership.
As
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 05:14:58PM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> That isn't the reason. Perusing the archives will yield the real
> answer. Because a newbie Debian user *may* read the archvies and *may*
> decided to click on the link there to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 10:02:05AM -0500, Bojan Baros wrote:
> Obviously, there might be some good reasons for this behavior that I
> am not aware off (besides "it helps me build up my Bayes database and
> test my av"), so please enlighten me.
Please
Bojan Baros wrote:
David did bring a good point as well, about opportunity to ask
question without being exposed to the volume of the list, and using
gmane or some other way of reading the posts, instead of receiving
them in the email box.
That about settles it for me, unless someone has something
s. keeling wrote:
Which brings up another thing; all the talk about scanning the list
for viruses, only allowing those subscribed to post, etc., yada yada.
If they weren't using Windows to read mail, they wouldn't have a
problem, would they? Why are so many considering reworking the list
just to s
> On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 10:31, Sebastiaan wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Bojan Baros wrote:
>>
>> > Hello deb users.
>> >
>> > I got a little issue with receiving some of the mails through this
>> > list...
>> >
>> > The entire list have been subjected to the inflow of spam,
>> viruses,
>
Incoming from Hugo Vanwoerkom:
>
> Does this mean that the volunteer list maintainer who has limited time
> to maintain the list is a Debian Developer,
> or can there be other volunteers to do this who DO have more time? I am
> under the impression that recently there is NO maintenance of this l
Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
Sebastiaan wrote:
I think there is a nice practical reason for this. The list operator
doesn't have time to delete every spam user from this list. The operator
is also someone who is maintaining the list in his free time.
Does this mean that the volunteer list maintainer who
Sebastiaan wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Bojan Baros wrote:
Hello deb users.
The entire list have been subjected to the inflow of spam, viruses,
auto-responders finding virus or spam, clueless users or someone who
just wants to mess around with the list.
I think there is a nice practical rea
On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 10:31, Sebastiaan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Bojan Baros wrote:
>
> > Hello deb users.
> >
> > I got a little issue with receiving some of the mails through this
> > list...
> >
> > The entire list have been subjected to the inflow of spam, viruses,
> > auto-respo
Hi,
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Bojan Baros wrote:
> Hello deb users.
>
> I got a little issue with receiving some of the mails through this
> list...
>
> The entire list have been subjected to the inflow of spam, viruses,
> auto-responders finding virus or spam, clueless users or someone who
> just wan
Hello deb users.
I got a little issue with receiving some of the mails through this
list...
The entire list have been subjected to the inflow of spam, viruses,
auto-responders finding virus or spam, clueless users or someone who
just wants to mess around with the list.
Why isn't there a limitati
24 matches
Mail list logo
