Hi Steven
Thanks for your answer and sorry about TOFU - OWA is a pain ;-).
Re: AGB - sure, but: If the service is *free*, the user shouldn't really complain
about SMTP not being available.
Re: Paying dial-up customers: I'm sure they appreciate the situation with SPAM and
will not object
:12PM +0100, Fermin Sanchez wrote:
Hm - pardon my asking, but: What (legal) reason should a dial-up
user have to send mail over his own mail server? I don't see the
problem in banning *dial-up*-ranges of providers which repeatedly
fail to prevent spam from sometimes repeatedly the same sources
the same communication channel ;-)
And more: what the hell has PGP with SPAM to do??
greetzs
steven
PGP: http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid14_gci214292,00.html or
www.pgpi.org
-Original Message-
From: Fermin Sanchez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
: [swinog] Mailempfang wegen SPAM blockiert / Mail receipt because of Spam
blocks
hi fermin
i think the best would be, that you get back to the main subject why this mailing has
been started.
-steven
-Original Message-
From: Fermin Sanchez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
]
Subject: Re: [swinog] Mailempfang wegen SPAM blockiert / Mail receipt because of Spam
blocks
Hi,
On Thursday 30 October 2003 13:53, Fermin Sanchez wrote:
[PGP in mailing lists]
Without wanting to start some kind of jihad of emailing here:
Information on mailing lists is seldom quite
wegen SPAM blockiert / Mail receipt because of Spam
blocks
* on the Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 01:53:32PM +0100, Fermin Sanchez wrote:
It's not as if I'd have anything to hide about my communications partners.
Yeah, the usual killer-argument. Sadly enough, it doesn't matter whether
you've got
Hello
Hm - pardon my asking, but: What (legal) reason should a dial-up user have to send
mail over his own mail server? I don't see the problem in banning *dial-up*-ranges of
providers which repeatedly fail to prevent spam from sometimes repeatedly the same
sources.
Regards
Fermin
