On Sun 11 Oct 2015 at 20:40:32 +0200, [email protected] wrote: > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 06:50:13PM +0100, Brian wrote: > > [...] > > > Can we discard this crystal ball of yours and cast a few runes or examine > > chicken entrails instead? :) > > :-) > > > X-Spam-Status gives a list of SpamAssassin tests that returned a non-zero > > value. I am going to assume the Debian mailing list for -user assigns a > > negative score if the poster is a list member (why should your score be > > pushed closer to 4.0?). > > sounds plausible: but still, why specifically "-user" and not just "subscribed > to any Debian list"? Both would make kind of sense.
I am not (stating the obvious) a Listmaster. My plausible analysis stands until it is shot down, > > Which raises the question of whether maderios was ever unsubscribed from > > -user. This will remove his motivation for having to reprimand his cat > > for being underhand or devious. It leaves open the question whether the > > resubscription did any good or if it was some other readjustment of the > > system which restored reception of list mails. > > I'm all for the poor cat, although I'm confident Madarias is a nice person. Without a doubt. > Re-subscription seems to have solved the issue anyhow. Besides the cat, > a couple of bounces to the list might de-activate the subscription. You are convinced subscribing again was the solution. Why? Did you stand at maderios' shoulder? > > > -user? or just any debian.org list? Only postmasters know... > > > > The incidence of LDOSUBSCRIBER in my -systemd archive is zero. Other > > lists do not appear to rely on it in the same way as -user. > > Well, that settles the one point above. Chicken entrails seem to be > more accurate than crystal balls :-) Sorry to cut this conversation short but I'm due for an appointment at my local Oracle in 10 minutes.
