Spam detection software, running on the system "mail3.optical.com.mx", has
identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: >I suggest to create a place where everyone can get
proper credits. Doc >Writers, Translators, and yes Coders too.
/credits ?? > >Once you have created that place, it might be less
needed to mix credits >witd pure documentation. Everybody, happy. >
>What's you opinion ? > > > [...]
Content analysis details: (5.2 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60%
[score: 0.4195]
3.8 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org
[<http://dsbl.org/listing?200.78.52.56>]
0.4 RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY RBL: NJABL: sender is an open proxy
[200.78.52.56 listed in combined.njabl.org]
0.1 RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL RBL: NJABL: dialup sender did non-local SMTP
[200.78.52.56 listed in combined.njabl.org]
2.0 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address
[200.78.52.56 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]
-1.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
--- Begin Message ---
I suggest to create a place where everyone can get proper credits. Doc
Writers, Translators, and yes Coders too. /credits ??
Once you have created that place, it might be less needed to mix credits
witd pure documentation. Everybody, happy.
What's you opinion ?
I totally agree. And qmail-ldap authors and Dan Bernstein deserve to be
there.
In a private mail I suggested Bruno to put a description of papers and
its content, and if he wanted put in () the author of doc(Andre in that
case).
But well, he reverted changes and put whatever he likes, withour prior
discussion.
I cant deal with that.
Omar
--- End Message ---
