Jay R. Ashworth wrote: >So what are you going to do? > >Outlaw Outlook? > >:-) >
Don't laugh--one of the filters we provide our users is "it says it came from Outlook" and "it has an attachment". Users can choose that if both of those conditions are met, the message is bounced back to the sender with an explanation that they don't accept Outlook mail that contains attachments! John Baxter wrote: >Plus, I fear the "new breed" spammers (the ones who actually think their >advertising is useful and welcome and only sent to opt-in lists, although >they buy the lists from guys who [figuratively] sell them from under a >trenchcoat at the entrance to a dark alley) will cause legislation to be >passed forbidding filtering at the mail server level. It nearly happened >last time around. I don't understand why people can't look at history. Get the government involved in spam legislation, and eventually businesses will convince the government to require us to receive spam. Jerry -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sandiego.edu/~jerry/ Serra 188B/x8773 -- The more restrictions there are, the poorer the people become. The greater the government's power, the more chaotic the nation would become. The more the ruler imposes laws and prohibitions on his people, the more frequently evil deeds would occur. --The Silence of the Wise: The Sayings of Lao Zi _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman-21/listinfo/mailman-developers
