On Sat, 07 Dec 2002, Lucky Green wrote: > It never ceases to amaze me that there are subscribers to this list that > don't have Choate filtered. This must be some weird list to read without > a Choate procmail filter...
Yes, my mistake. I've seen Choate devolve from a strange actor to a net.loon, and I should have known better. I thought an off-list hint might help, and that was my mistake. I promise never again to venture into Choate Prime. And yes, Jim goes back in the spam filter. > --Lucky, who probably should go back to filtering on "Choate" in the > body text of emails, not just in the headers. I didn't even need to see > that email. Probably for the best. I'm going to sleep now. -j, who shouldn't revisit past choices on spam filters. -- Jamie Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Crack don't smoke itself." -Traditional
