>> [removed the SPAM tag from subject] > > Which the mailing list put right back on. It seems that something in > the charter text is causing that, and I've asked the Secretariat IT > support to look into it. The worst part of this is that none of the > charter discussion is in the archive. > > I have put the proposed charter in the appsawg wiki: > http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/appsawg/trac/wiki/DMARC
The Secretariat gave their usual quick response (I just wasn't able to respond here as quickly): it seems that there's a .co.uk domain name used as an example in the charter text, that domain name is on a spam block list, and that caused a high spam score. That particular domain name has had its spamminess score reduced, so the problem should stop (though I'm not trusting it here, obviously). I've suggested that this represents a faulty spam rule: a blacklisted domain name in an address field should cause a high spam score, but it shouldn't do so when we're talking about the domain in the body of the message. I've also asked whether it's possible to get the missing messages put back into the archive. Meanwhile, discussions that include that part of the charter text shouldn't cause a problem any more. And just in case, it might not be a bad idea just to redact the domain name in question when you include the charter text. More when I know more. _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
