lows commercial message solicitation but the messages are subject to to a 25 cent per
bit delivery fee and all mail users reserve the right to charge 25 cents per bit or
the amount agreed to in a settlement as a reader fee All standard mail services are f
or preauthorized emails private in nature If you do not agree to pay these fees
disconnect and do not send your messages) with SMTP id h630eEk10445
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 19:40:14 -0500
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "James Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Subscribers of Qpopper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Challenge Response
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 19:39:27 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000
Disposition-Notification-To: "James Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2727.1300
The mass of messsage on this group has gotten to be a bit much as of lately.
I am certain _EVERYONE_ wanted to know that YOU had a problem and EVERYONE
will work to solve the problem with one person's mail system.
Note: Some other people also feel their time is of value as well. Let's
all do our best to respect others.
Best Regards.
James
P.s. I didn't send this message in the hope of receiving more messages or
to both anyone else with more noise. Hopefully we will have less noise now.
If I have offended anyone in any way I am sorry. Please delete the message
as you won't be hearing from me again.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Senie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Subscribers of Qpopper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 4:35 PM
Subject: Challenge Response
> Would the person using challenge response kindly instruct their software
to
> get a clue? I don't need to be spammed in response to a posting on a
> mailing list. I do not know the person whose systems generated this, and
> thus do NOT have any particular interest or desire to respond.
>
> Challenge / Response is a broken idea. Instead of dealing with your own
> spam problem, it puts the burden onto those with whom you converse. Sorry,
> you have to pay for my time if you want me to jump through hoops.
>
> >Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Received: from mail2.phonewave.net (mail2.phonewave.net [64.113.160.187])
> > by garlic.amaranth.net (8.11.7/8.11.7) with ESMTP id
h62KGTW21687
> > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 16:16:30 -0400
> >Received: from NETVISTAGENE ([64.113.160.22])
> > by mail2.phonewave.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id h62JllN17974
> > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 12:47:47 -0700
> >X-RAV-AntiVirus: This e-mail has been scanned for viruses on host:
> >mail2.phonewave.net
> >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: Re: Re: UIDL issues with QPopper? "104457"
> >Content-Type: text/plain;
> >To: Daniel Senie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 14:42:33 -0400
> >From: Gene Ponce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.3(snapshot 20030212) (mail2.phonewave.net)
> >X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0
> > tests=none
> > version=2.55-_amaranth_
> >X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55-_amaranth_
> >(1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp)
> >X-UIDL: X%T!!+N*!!3DJ!!bQi"!
> >
> >Thank you for sending me your email. I really want to receive it.
> >
> >In an effort to eliminate junk email, I am using Mail Wiper. Mail Wiper
> >has placed your message safely on hold.
> >
> >Please reply to this email and send it to me so I can add you to my eMail
> >address book and we will be able to communicate freely from now on.
> >
> >
> >Thank you for your assistance.
> >
> >
> >For 100% Junk free eMail please visit http://www.mailwiper.com
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Daniel Senie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Amaranth Networks Inc. http://www.amaranth.com
>
