ff and their capabilities
than I do, so I'll admit that I could be wrong...
Bill
- Original Message -
From: "Sanford Whiteman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Bill Landry"
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 1:47 PM
Subject: Re[4]: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 4.3 - Commto
> Just as SA and other spam apps have built in support for these
> freely available and open source spam services, nothing would have
> prevented Declude from doing the same.
Don't agree. Have you ever looked at the Rhyolite lists and looked at
Vernon's opinion of commercial DCC sofware
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sanford
Whiteman
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 4:06 PM
To: David Barker
Subject: Re[4]: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 4.3 - Commtouch trial ?
> This is totally untrue and unsubstantiated. We have NEVER censored
> these lists.
I can "s
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sanford
Whiteman
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 4:06 PM
To: David Barker
Subject: Re[4]: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 4.3 - Commtouch trial ?
> This is totally untrue and unsubstantiated. We have NE
> This is totally untrue and unsubstantiated. We have NEVER censored
> these lists.
I can "substantiate" using mail server logs from 3 successive days
that posts that contained purely technical content were passed to the
list exploder, while messages that contained passages questioning
