> I believe you , that you saw a special situation. Usually when I write > "I do not believe", I do not doubt personal honesty. > > I saw it as very unfortunate, to tell other people to do similar > things without having a real good (and different) theory of operation. > That was the reason, I argued in public here.
I understand completely now... Maybe - Michael can you confirm - would the solution be as simple as having a new option where the user can still have email addresses in outgoing messages added to the whitelist, but *not* have the messages themselves contributing to the ham corpus? -- Best regards, Charles ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Assp-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
