I would agree. Just a little tag [SA] so we'd know it's not garbage or spam - and also please fix the return address so that replies go to the list. This is the way the list was before. There's no reason to change it and both adjustments are easy to do with EZMLM.
At 04:16 PM 2/3/2004, Andy Donovan wrote:
me neither ... just a little tag, [SA] would be helpful, and as you mentioned 'Every' list I'm on also has the tag .. I thought it was the norm.
"Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate"
>>> Geoff Dyment <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 02/03/04 04:11PM >>> Ok, start in your little Anti-MS rant if that makes you happy. I'll help - Down with Bill, M$ is evil, Unix p0wns you, Sendmail forever!, blah blah blah. K, done?
Exchange works for our little office and we can't justify upgrading (which is why I went with free linux/free spamassassin front end). If there's a way to add the tag myself with postfix/spamassassin - great, I'll do it, I just have never heard such unjustified hatred for the Subject tags before.
Thanks!
Geoff
-----Original Message----- From: Scott Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 1:49 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Subject Tag
On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 01:36:04PM -0700, Geoff Dyment wrote: > If you want to be elitist and punish people with older software just so you
"older software"? You mean older than procmail?
HISTORY: Only the last entry is complete, the others might have been condensed.
1990/12/07: v1.00 1990/12/12: v1.01 1991/02/04: v1.02 1991/02/13: v1.10 1991/02/21: v1.20
Maybe you meant feature poor?
-- Scott Lambert KC5MLE Unix SysAdmin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Best Regards,
Jeff Koch, Intersessions
