At 10:07 AM 7/22/2001, Donald E. Eastlake 3rd wrote: >clearly 99.9% of spam is worse than the networksorcery >stuff. I suggest that stopping the worst of the spam should be higher >priority. an excellent goal. how can we objectively differentiate the one from the other? d/ ---------- Dave Crocker <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com> tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464
- Re: networksorcery.com spam Marshall T. Rose
- Re: networksorcery.com spam Vernon Schryver
- Re: networksorcery.com spam Michael Mealling
- Re: networksorcery.com spam Marshall T. Rose
- Re: networksorcery.com spam Gary E. Miller
- Re: networksorcery.com spam Marshall T. Rose
- Re: networksorcery.com spam TRAICOVN (NW)
- Re: networksorcery.com sp... Jose Manuel Arronte Garcia
- Re: networksorcery.com sp... John Stracke
- Re: networksorcery.com spam Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
- Re: networksorcery.com sp... Dave Crocker
- Re: networksorcery.co... Jim Fleming
- Re: networksorcery.co... Paul Ebersman
- Keep on IPv4 address.... Jim Fleming
- Re: networksorcery.com spam Dave Crocker
- Re: networksorcery.com spam Vernon Schryver
- RE: networksorcery.com spam Christian Huitema
- Re: networksorcery.com spam Vernon Schryver
- Re: networksorcery.com spam Bob Braden
- Re: networksorcery.com spam Jim Fleming
- Re: networksorcery.com spam Vernon Schryver
