|
>> SpamCop
has a very serious and obvious problem, and I think it might be the result of a
bug or something because clearly this wasn't always the case. Imperfect as
they may be, SpamCop could fix this problem and greatly improve on their present
reliability. <<
Sorry
for stating the obvious... Have you considered reporting a suspected bug to
SpamCop - that may yield better results. I don't believe Julian monitors this
list.
|
Title: Message
- RE: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Question ab... Andy Schmidt
- RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Question about Som... Markus Gufler
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Question abou... Joshua Levitsky
- RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL on SP... Andy Schmidt
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL on SP... Matt
- RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL on SP... Andy Schmidt
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL on SP... Matt
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL on SP... Andy Schmidt
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL on SP... Matt
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Question ... Matt
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Question ... R. Scott Perry
- RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Question about Some Spam Tests Colbeck, Andrew
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Question about Some Spam Tests Matt
- RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Question about Some Spam Tests Markus Gufler
- [Declude.JunkMail] Turn on ONLY Virus Scan Chris Butler
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Turn on ONLY Virus Sca... R. Scott Perry
