>>"Not accepting bounces makes you look just like tons of spammers."
>>
>>                                  -Len Conrad to Kami Razvan

> ... has nothing to do AT ALL with null senders.

Not accepting bounces has *nothing* to do with rejecting null senders?
*Nothing* to do at all? Uh...huh. I'll wait to see that on your 'Len's
Hints'  page. Wait, though: you might be embarrassed there in front of
your  PostFix  constituency,  so  you can just post that kind of thing
here,  where we Windozers apparently won't notice your evasive tactics
once  you've been corrected for the umpteenth time. Take your fight to
Bill  Gates,  since your real gripe seems to be that you can't convert
the whole Windows community with sharp talk and all-lowercase trolls.

You  can't  reject  null senders for particular recipients in Ipswitch
IMail  Server  (that's  the product we use here--maybe you've heard of
it).  Therefore,  rejecting  *all*  null  senders--which of course has
*always*  been  intimately  related  to bounce acceptance, despite the
above  silly  claim  to  the contrary which should make all of us mail
admins  perplexed  at your historical competence--is the *only* way to
have  the  situation  you  thought  Kami had: "not accepting bounces."
Therefore,  since  one  assumes  on  the  *IMail*  Forum  that posters
understand  that  the  questions  are about IMail...well, you put that
together.

> with  no  contribution  from  you,  to  MY  exchange  with  KAMI, he
> confirmed that his sender address does accept inbound mail.

He  only  needed  to  "confirm" it to you because you never, ever read
carefully. It was clear from his post (to people that take the time to
read) that THAT WASN'T WHAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT.

> Why was it confirmed off list? Was it perhaps that his post was open to
> more than one interpretation?

I  used  the term "off-list" because I sent a note apologizing to Kami
for  the  list's  (i.e.  your)  rude behavior and explaining that your
misconstruing  of his post was at fault, not his server configuration,
and  that he should not shy away from the thread after your attack. In
fact,  it  was  "confirmed"  within  his  original  message, which was
perfectly clear.

> congratulations,  your  are  your  own best, fan. But, WTF does that
> have to with the exchange I am having with Kami?

In  an  "exchange,"  or,  as  you call it elsewhere, a "dialogue," you
don't tell the person (1) "It's your nightmare"; (2) "Your error"; (3)
a  "false  problem"; (4) "stop making your error." In an exchange, you
read  for  content  instead of attacking, you help the person with the
issue  they  have--not  one they don't have, in fact *can't* have--and
you apologize for your errors. What you posted, on the other hand, was
a  tirade,  baseless,  and useless to Kami's issue. I posted the exact
information  that  Kami  was  seeking--after  all, I do actually *use*
IMail,  unlike  you--while  you  were  three-deep  into your own posts
before  you  finally figured out Kami's first. Then, at last, the coup
de grace: Len doesn't like challenge/response. I was on the edge of my
seat  waiting to see if you'd ever figure out the situation--but then,
to my pleasure, you had an *opinion* about it, too! Bravo!

-Sandy


------------------------------------
Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist
Broadleaf Systems, a division of
Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc.
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------


To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/

Reply via email to