On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 03:49:03PM -0600, Kyle Wheeler wrote: > Now, I don't have a particularly strong opinion on either of these > methods (though I acknowledge both their strengths and weaknesses)... > but isn't this the pot calling the kettle black here? > > I mean, you have two potential sources of irritation for "people who > legitimately want to send you mail" (however you wish to define > "legitimately"): > > 1. A challenge message demanding proof that you're not a spammer > > 2. A refusal to give you a valid email address, and a glib retort > to thank the spammers > > And one of these is supposed to be less irritating than the other? <SNIP>
Ok, you made me laugh! FYI, greylisting doesn't work like that. There's no need (mostly) to manually intervene. The system I'm using (OpenBSD's spamd) *temporarily* rejects mail from an unknown server. Real, normal servers will keep it queued and retry shortly. If retries follow behavior specified in RFCs then the server is whitelisted, automatically. -- Darrin Chandler | Phoenix BSD User Group | MetaBUG [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://phxbug.org/ | http://metabug.org/ http://www.stilyagin.com/ | Daemons in the Desert | Global BUG Federation
