lows commercial message solicitation but the messages are subject to to a 25 cent per
bit delivery fee and all mail users reserve the right to charge 25 cents per bit or
the amount agreed to in a settlement as a reader fee All standard mail services are f
or preauthorized emails private in nature If you do not agree to pay these fees
disconnect and do not send your messages) with SMTP id h068WO128732;
Mon, 6 Jan 2003 02:32:24 -0600
Message-ID: <006101c2b55e$21a09300$4b02a8c0@destroyer>
From: "James Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "John Rudd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: {Virus?} RE: Onmouseout
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 02:32:15 -0600
Errors-To: List Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=subscribe>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.pensive.org/mailing_lists/archives/qpopper/>
List-Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Owner: Pensive Mailing List Admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Help: http://www.pensive.org/Mailing_Lists/
List-Id: <QPopper.lists.pensive.org>
List-Software: AutoShare 4.2.3 by Mikael Hansen
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Not everyone runs "Virge" (or something of that sort) for attachment
stripping and virus protection from 3 different vendors in series on their
SMTP/POP implementatoin.
Glad I do.... :^)
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Rudd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: {Virus?} RE: Onmouseout
> > From: "Phil Stubbington" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > All,
> >
> > In case your anti-virus software didn't pick it up, this message had the
> > W32.Klez.E@mm virus attached to it.
> >
> > See
> >
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > for more info.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Phil
>
> Is there a reason you intentionally sent everyone on the list a copy of a
> live virus ... especially when you don't know the state of everyone's
virus
> scanning infrastructure? Seems rather unethical to me.
>
>
