On Sun, 30 Oct 2005, Michael Monnerie moaned: > On Sonntag, 30. Oktober 2005 08:38 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> This domain is not a dialup and is a static IP address, and >> completely traceable to me. It has also never been involved in >> sending spam. If the anti-spam community start misbehaving the >> future is indeed bleak. ==John ffitch > > Your still misbehaving too:
It's not `misbehaviour'. It's just a slight spamsign. > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.96 tagged_above=-999 required=5 > tests=NO_REAL_NAME=0.961, SPF_PASS=-0.001 > > Please set a *real name* in your mailer. Why should he? 0.961 is nowhere near enough to class the mail as spam. (The real problem is that this list is spamfiltered at all: it's ridiculous to spamfilter a list on which spams are regularly dissected.) -- `"Gun-wielding recluse gunned down by local police" isn't the epitaph I want. I am hoping for "Witnesses reported the sound up to two hundred kilometers away" or "Last body part finally located".' --- James Nicoll
