[Stepping into this fray, as a long time Earthlink subscriber who has my
Spam Filter on HIGH due to a spam attack of the worst kind (I have the
article here if you want to look at it, but google Nigerian 419 and read
the US Treasury Department's take on this.)]

Alan Frayer wrote:
> If I were to know YOU were going to reply, I would perhaps whitelist
> you. Since the list tells the filter the e-mail address of the sender
> as the sender, it would be impossible to tell the filter to approve
> all e-mail from the list, so subscribing to the list would completely
> invalidate Earthlink's filter.
>
> If, on the other hand, the list were to identify its messages as from
> the list, Earthlink subscribers could reasonably whitelist messages
> from the list, and subscribing would be more practical for them. Right
> now, it is very impractical.
>
Huh?  I have the list whitelisted and it took only one time and I was fine.

> And because it is impractical, I wouldn't be as harsh on Earthlink
> subscribers who don't subscribe, personally.
>
They can subscribe and get messages without a problem.  The thing is
that we, the list members, allow anonymous postings (this postings
without subscribing) and this is the source of many posts that end up
with a series of replies and then a nastygram that we do not reply as
the sender sent their message directly to the list expecting private
replies to them.  On top of this, this list is echoed to GMANE and
Google lists where messages posted in those news lists are then sent to
this list.

As sad a state of affairs this is, it is better than users abandoning
OpenOffice.org at the first trouble and never returning.

James McKenzie
I just celebrated my 6th year with Earthlink.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to