Malte S. Stretz wrote:

[snip]

> But I must admit that I stopped reading your 
>other thread after I read the words "patent", "(tm)"

So you are against trademarks.  Okay.  So I thus may use your name without your
permission and pretend to be you?

> and "100% 
>Accurate"

I did not write that in this dev list.

If you are referring to our web site, then it clearly says:

http://www.accuspam.com/faq.php#as_spam

The only way to get absolute 100% spam blocking is to configure "Daily Summary"
ON and "SMTP integration".


In that case, the false negatives (undetected spam) is sent in a Daily
Summary.  It helps to read before you make cynical judgements.


> (just before your MUA stopped to add In-Reply-To headers and the 
>thread was broken),

I am using Eudora.  It is used by millions.  My point stands that if you add
Sender: header to ezlm, then it will work better.  That is a fact.


 so it might be a good idea if you also wrote some more 
>technical description with less buzzwords so one can easily find out what 
>AccuSpam(tm) is actually about and how it works.


I guess you did not read where we wrote that AccuTechnology is what we are
proposing, not AccuSpam.


[snip]

>  (Even if we don't include 
>it in the core, you will have a plugin which your customers can easily add 
>to their SpamAssassin installation.)

Yes that is cool.

I am more concerned at this juncture (due to the continued belligerent attitude
towards me) with evaluating the attitude here.  I am wondering it is possible
have harmony and good working relationships.  To depend on investment not being
subverted in future.  I certainly am trying.  I sense a religious fervor here
to kill anything commercial.   That concerns me as a person who runs a
for-profit business.



Reply via email to