Re: Marking as spam
On 2024-04-18 at 11:53, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: > On 18/04/2024 12:43, Hans wrote: > >> But the "Sorry" mail I did send without the spam tag. However, I >> get it WITH the spamtag, as all mails get the DCIM=false tag in the >> header (created by the debian servers) and megamailservers.eu add >> the SPAM tag. > > Or you could use a less shitty mail service, because failed DKIM (I > assume that's what you mean by DCIM=false) does not mean that an > email is a spam. Good luck convincing a provider which has decided to do this of that. > Conversely, I see a lot of spams that have a valid DKIM signature. > > Moreover, I don't think the Debian list servers validate DKIM. It's > probably your host that is doing so. > > And finally, your own mails fail DKIM, so for a mail server that > seems to give so much importance to DKIM, they could at least set it > up right. My understanding, based I think in part on past conversations, was/is that changes which are often made to messages automatically by mailing-list software as part of forwarding them through to the list members have the side effect of causing DKIM checks to fail (at least with some DKIM-validating configurations, I'm not sure about all). If that is correct, then not only would that likely be the reason for Hans' mail provider seeing DKIM validation failing for all mails from debian-user, it would also mean that mails from Hans would probably fail DKIM validation for those who receive them through debian-user - without meaning that his mail provider is necessarily doing DKIM wrong, at least on the sending end. A way to check that might be to have Hans send a mail to someone both via the list and not, or (if that gets filtered out by some relevant software as being a duplicate) send two mails, one via the list and the other not. If the one via the list has the header flag for failed DKIM, and the other doesn't, that would seem to narrow down the possibilities. (I am not volunteering for this.) On the other hand, if my understanding is *not* correct, then none of that applies. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Marking as spam
On 18/04/2024 12:43, Hans wrote: But the "Sorry" mail I did send without the spam tag. However, I get it WITH the spamtag, as all mails get the DCIM=false tag in the header (created by the debian servers) and megamailservers.eu add the SPAM tag. Or you could use a less shitty mail service, because failed DKIM (I assume that's what you mean by DCIM=false) does not mean that an email is a spam. Conversely, I see a lot of spams that have a valid DKIM signature. Moreover, I don't think the Debian list servers validate DKIM. It's probably your host that is doing so. And finally, your own mails fail DKIM, so for a mail server that seems to give so much importance to DKIM, they could at least set it up right. -- Nothing can be done in one trip. -- Snider Eduardo M KALINOWSKI edua...@kalinowski.com.br
Re: *****SPAM***** Marking as spam
Am Donnerstag, 18. April 2024, 17:21:41 CEST schrieb rtnetz...@windstream.net: To make clear: The first time I replied, I forgot to remove the spam tag. But the "Sorry" mail I did send without the spam tag. However, I get it WITH the spamtag, as all mails get the DCIM=false tag in the header (created by the debian servers) and megamailservers.eu add the SPAM tag. Those, who receive their mails on another way, are not affected, but I am. Thus, I get some mails from the debian list with SPAM tag and some without, depending how I received it. I can not fix this (as already described in another thread on this list here), so I had to create a whitelist rule in my spamrules. However, yes, you can expect from me, that I remove the SPAM tag, when I reply of mails. If I reply, I am not sure, if the spam tag is recreated, whilst the DCIM=false tag might be kept in the reply mails (did not examine this). Of course, I will watch to remove the spam tag when replying in the future. Promised! Best Hans > As I understand what he wrote, the SPAM tag is added after the message > leaves his control. > > - Original Message - > From: "Nicolas George" > To: "debian-user" > Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2024 11:13:44 AM > Subject: Re: *SPAM* Marking as spam [was: *SPAM* Re: > LibreOffice removed from Debian] > Hans (12024-04-18): > > As I can not fix it > > You can manually remove “*SPAM*” from the mail when you reply. > > You could even automate it on your end.
Re: *****SPAM***** Marking as spam [was: *****SPAM***** Re: LibreOffice removed from Debian]
rtnetz...@windstream.net (12024-04-18): > As I understand what he wrote, the SPAM tag is added after the message leaves > his control. I very much doubt it, we would see “*SPAM* Re:” rather than “Re: *SPAM*”. And his recent “Sorry” mail was not tagged. https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2024/04/msg00294.html Regards, -- Nicolas George
Re: *****SPAM***** Marking as spam [was: *****SPAM***** Re: LibreOffice removed from Debian]
As I understand what he wrote, the SPAM tag is added after the message leaves his control. - Original Message - From: "Nicolas George" To: "debian-user" Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2024 11:13:44 AM Subject: Re: *****SPAM* Marking as spam [was: *SPAM* Re: LibreOffice removed from Debian] Hans (12024-04-18): > As I can not fix it You can manually remove “*SPAM*” from the mail when you reply. You could even automate it on your end. -- Nicolas George -- Bob Netzlof a/k/a Sweet Old Bob
Re: *****SPAM***** Marking as spam [was: *****SPAM***** Re: LibreOffice removed from Debian]
Hans (12024-04-18): > As I can not fix it You can manually remove “*SPAM*” from the mail when you reply. You could even automate it on your end. -- Nicolas George
Re: *****SPAM***** Marking as spam [was: *****SPAM***** Re: LibreOffice removed from Debian]
Am Donnerstag, 18. April 2024, 11:53:38 CEST schrieb to...@tuxteam.de: Hi Tomas, this is by debian servers, I talked about this for a while. Because the debian servers mark some things in the header, megamailservers.eu mark them as spam and add SPAM to the headline. As I can not fix it and debian admins will also not do, and I just answered to the debian mail, you see the spam mark in the headline. I am no motre thinking of it, because everything was said in another theread in this list. For myself I made a rule in spamassassin, that mails from debian are whitelisted, although they are marked as spam and although they are appearing with SPA in the headline - as I know, they are NO spam! Hope, this explains it. Best Hans > Hi, Hans > > is it your mail setup adding that *SPAM* decoration to the > subject? > > Just curious... > > cheers
Marking as spam [was: *****SPAM***** Re: LibreOffice removed from Debian]
Hi, Hans is it your mail setup adding that *SPAM* decoration to the subject? Just curious... cheers -- t signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
On 2/24/06, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Cybe R. Wizard wrote: Interestingly, there is no two-line instruction on your mail. I've noticed the same for some other people, too, but haven't chased it down. Hint: it is there, your client isn't showing it, and it is related to gpg support. Mutt doesn't show it (by default? I don't know if this can be changed). There are some mails in this thread for me where I don't have the UNSUBSCRIBE directions at the bottom. I tried using gmail's show original feature and it didn't show the 2 lines. Also, one of the mails wasn't gpg signed (the one by Scott). So perhaps it's a list software problem, instead of being related to gpg settings. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] On this one it obviously did show up, so gmail isn't swallowing them all. greets, Wim
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 13:45:12 +0100 Wim De Smet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2/24/06, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Cybe R. Wizard wrote: Interestingly, there is no two-line instruction on your mail. I've noticed the same for some other people, too, but haven't chased it down. Hint: it is there, your client isn't showing it, and it is related to gpg support. Mutt doesn't show it (by default? I don't know if this can be changed). There are some mails in this thread for me where I don't have the UNSUBSCRIBE directions at the bottom. I tried using gmail's show original feature and it didn't show the 2 lines. Also, one of the mails wasn't gpg signed (the one by Scott). So perhaps it's a list software problem, instead of being related to gpg settings. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] On this one it obviously did show up, so gmail isn't swallowing them all. greets, Wim But on your mail it doesn't. How do you post? Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 12:47:50PM -0500, Gregory Seidman wrote: On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 11:38:00AM -0500, Kevin Mark wrote: } Hi spam-killers, } Here is a new test system to improve spam reporting in Debian. } It seems mutt users will be the primary ones to use this. Sure, no problem. Now, given that I archive my spam (yes, spamassassin is trained on everything that has come in, but what if I want to change to some other system that needs training later? disk space is cheap...), should I go through it and find all the spam that passed through debian-user and bounce it? I can. It's easy. I just have to do it a little carefully so that my ISP doesn't think *I'm* sending spam. } Cheers, } Kev --Greg Hi Greg, et al. I and others inquired about getting spam reporting on the -devel list. 'Cord' made the setup and IIRC is in change of this. So, i'd ask him! Hopefully, this will help reduce debian-mailing-list spam! I just wanted to get the word out, as I and most others enjoy killing spam and wanted to waste no time in doing so! Cheers, Kev -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal | debian.home.pipeline.com | | `. `' Operating System| go to counter.li.org and | | `-http://www.debian.org/ |be counted! #238656 | | my keysever: pgp.mit.edu | my NPO: cfsg.org | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 09:01:52PM -0700, Scott wrote: Alex Nordstrom spake thusly on 02/24/2006 10:06 AM: Saturday, 25 February 2006 00:38, Kevin Mark wrote: Here is a new test system to improve spam reporting in Debian. It seems mutt users will be the primary ones to use this. Presumably, KMail users should also be able to participate. And Thunderbird and Sylpheed... What's with this Mutt Users [only] stuff? Hi Scott, I use mutt and the poster (Cord) only mentioned that he knew of using mutt and He (and I also) didn't know of the other ways to do this. So, I know many folks here use Mutt as I do. So, I thought it 'safe' to only direct mutt users, as I didn't know if others could use a similar method. I should have made it 'all users' as folks here know stuff I dont. It was a moment where I did not think clearly and shot off the mail with out engaging 'brain'. Mea Culpa. Cheers, Kev -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal | debian.home.pipeline.com | | `. `' Operating System| go to counter.li.org and | | `-http://www.debian.org/ |be counted! #238656 | | my keysever: pgp.mit.edu | my NPO: cfsg.org | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:08:17 -0600 Jacob S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:38:00 -0500 Kevin Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi spam-killers, Here is a new test system to improve spam reporting in Debian. It seems mutt users will be the primary ones to use this. Cheers, Kev Sylpheed users are also on the list of people with a client that can do this. Jacob Do you mean Message-Redirect ? Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 13:40:04 +0200 Andrei Popescu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:08:17 -0600 Jacob S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:38:00 -0500 Kevin Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi spam-killers, Here is a new test system to improve spam reporting in Debian. It seems mutt users will be the primary ones to use this. Cheers, Kev Sylpheed users are also on the list of people with a client that can do this. Jacob Do you mean Message-Redirect ? Yes. Works for me. Jacob -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEAI2bkpJ43hY3cTURAm7fAKDnuFzKoZChu/BV4JJFa5Kps0KM2gCfUv4l xJzAqXD/rJ89tcOYSUhbq8M= =rwSK -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
Alex Nordstrom spake thusly on 02/24/2006 10:06 AM: Saturday, 25 February 2006 00:38, Kevin Mark wrote: Here is a new test system to improve spam reporting in Debian. It seems mutt users will be the primary ones to use this. Presumably, KMail users should also be able to participate. And Thunderbird and Sylpheed... What's with this Mutt Users [only] stuff? -- Scott www.angrykeyboarder.com © 2006 angrykeyboarder™ Elmer Fudd. All Wights Wesewved
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
John Halton spake thusly on 02/24/2006 09:51 AM: On 2/24/06, Kevin Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [1] Bounce as in mutt b. I don't know if and how this can be done in thunderbird Apparently the following extension allows bouncing using Thunderbird - http://mailredirect.mozdev.org/ Haven't looked into it any further though so don't know if it will work in all circumstances or for this particular purpose. I've been using that extension for quite a while. I don't see why it wouldn't work in this instance. -- Scott www.angrykeyboarder.com © 2006 angrykeyboarder™ Elmer Fudd. All Wights Wesewved
MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
Hi spam-killers, Here is a new test system to improve spam reporting in Debian. It seems mutt users will be the primary ones to use this. Cheers, Kev - Forwarded message from Cord Beermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 07:03:31 -0600 To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Hallo! Du (Cord Beermann) hast geschrieben: The idea of having a reporting address is good, i'll will announce one in the next days and then lets see what happens. ok, here it is: (alpha release, lets see what happens and if it is useful.) If you get spam via our lists, BOUNCE[1] it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Incomplete mails[2] will be discarded, * mis-use (report of non-spam, mass-reporting of one spam, automatic forwarding based on some automatism (scores of Anti-Spamtools or something)) will be blacklisted. The reported mails will be used to enhance our Spamassassin and procmail-filters. The mails will be stored non-public. [1] Bounce as in mutt b. I don't know if and how this can be done in thunderbird, or M$ LookOut. If it possible someone may explain it in a follow up. Forwarding is NOT ok at this time, those mails will be discarded. [2] I want complete mails. this means: ALL Headers and the body. If your system adds its own headers, or overwrites our Spamassassin-Headers it's ok, Cord -- http://lists.debian.org - End forwarded message - -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal | debian.home.pipeline.com | | `. `' Operating System| go to counter.li.org and | | `-http://www.debian.org/ |be counted! #238656 | | my keysever: pgp.mit.edu | my NPO: cfsg.org | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
On 2/24/06, Kevin Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [1] Bounce as in mutt b. I don't know if and how this can be done in thunderbird Apparently the following extension allows bouncing using Thunderbird - http://mailredirect.mozdev.org/ Haven't looked into it any further though so don't know if it will work in all circumstances or for this particular purpose.
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
Saturday, 25 February 2006 00:38, Kevin Mark wrote: Here is a new test system to improve spam reporting in Debian. It seems mutt users will be the primary ones to use this. Presumably, KMail users should also be able to participate. - Forwarded message from Cord Beermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] - If you get spam via our lists, BOUNCE[1] it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] The way to seemingly achieve the same effect in KMail 1.9.1 is to use Message-Forward-Redirect (shortcut: E). I believe older versions had the same feature under Message-Bounce (which seems to be supported by an obviously outdated section of the manual). I'm sure someone will point out if this feature does not meet the requirements of this application. Now, as a question of policy, are the half-dozen daily unsubscribe messages from those too illiterate to comprehend a two-line instruction added in caps to every message on the list considered spam? They're certainly unsolicited (nobody wants 'em) bulk (they're bothering everyone on the list) e-mail. What about challenge-response junk, false bounces from misconfigured spamfilters, and out-of-the-office replies? -- Alex Nordstrom http://lx.n3.net/ Please do not CC me in followups; I am subscribed to debian-user. pgphv9ULboaQ2.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006, Alex Nordstrom wrote: Now, as a question of policy, are the half-dozen daily unsubscribe messages from those too illiterate to comprehend a two-line instruction added in caps to every message on the list considered spam? They're certainly unsolicited (nobody wants 'em) bulk (they're bothering everyone on the list) e-mail. What about challenge-response junk, false bounces from misconfigured spamfilters, and out-of-the-office replies? All of those are SPAM, if you go by the It is utterly useless crap *AND* it is off-topic *AND* it was generated by layer 8 malfunction or by viruses or by autoresponders *AND* it did not spawn a thread. After all, if people started replying to a SPAM and it made a thread out of it, no matter how off-topic for the list that thread is, the entire thing (spam included) it is probably best left alone in the archives. PS: layer 8: refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model, Humor. -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 11:38:00AM -0500, Kevin Mark wrote: } Hi spam-killers, } Here is a new test system to improve spam reporting in Debian. } It seems mutt users will be the primary ones to use this. Sure, no problem. Now, given that I archive my spam (yes, spamassassin is trained on everything that has come in, but what if I want to change to some other system that needs training later? disk space is cheap...), should I go through it and find all the spam that passed through debian-user and bounce it? I can. It's easy. I just have to do it a little carefully so that my ISP doesn't think *I'm* sending spam. } Cheers, } Kev --Greg } - Forwarded message from Cord Beermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] - } Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 07:03:31 -0600 } To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org } } Hallo! Du (Cord Beermann) hast geschrieben: } } The idea of having a reporting address is good, i'll will announce one } in the next days and then lets see what happens. } } ok, here it is: (alpha release, lets see what happens and if it is } useful.) } } If you get spam via our lists, BOUNCE[1] it to } [EMAIL PROTECTED] } } * Incomplete mails[2] will be discarded, } * mis-use (report of non-spam, mass-reporting of one spam, automatic }forwarding based on some automatism (scores of Anti-Spamtools or }something)) will be blacklisted. } } The reported mails will be used to enhance our Spamassassin and } procmail-filters. The mails will be stored non-public. } } [1] Bounce as in mutt b. I don't know if and how this can be done in } thunderbird, or M$ LookOut. If it possible someone may explain } it in a follow up. Forwarding is NOT ok at this time, those } mails will be discarded. } } [2] I want complete mails. this means: ALL Headers and the body. If } your system adds its own headers, or overwrites our } Spamassassin-Headers it's ok, } } Cord } -- } http://lists.debian.org } - End forwarded message - } -- } | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | } | : :' : The Universal | debian.home.pipeline.com | } | `. `' Operating System| go to counter.li.org and | } | `-http://www.debian.org/ |be counted! #238656 | } | my keysever: pgp.mit.edu | my NPO: cfsg.org | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:38:00 -0500 Kevin Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi spam-killers, Here is a new test system to improve spam reporting in Debian. It seems mutt users will be the primary ones to use this. Cheers, Kev Sylpheed users are also on the list of people with a client that can do this. Jacob -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFD/3XEkpJ43hY3cTURAg84AJ4u/U9qnwcm00U7TTSlNxdMPfBo2QCgszrI GMfOVZothc91/30bM6O3K4g= =P4XW -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 01:06:27 +0800 Alex Nordstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now, as a question of policy, are the half-dozen daily unsubscribe messages from those too illiterate to comprehend a two-line instruction added in caps to every message on the list considered spam? They're certainly unsolicited (nobody wants 'em) bulk (they're bothering everyone on the list) e-mail. What about challenge-response junk, false bounces from misconfigured spamfilters, and out-of-the-office replies? (copying the .sig and everything below it back in) -- Alex Nordstrom http://lx.n3.net/ Please do not CC me in followups; I am subscribed to debian-user. [application/pgp-signature (189 bytes)] Interestingly, there is no two-line instruction on your mail. I've noticed the same for some other people, too, but haven't chased it down. Cybe R. Wizard -- When Windows are opened the bugs come in. Winduhs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MUTT users PLEASE read [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: lists.d.o Spam (was: Marking BTS spam)]
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Cybe R. Wizard wrote: Interestingly, there is no two-line instruction on your mail. I've noticed the same for some other people, too, but haven't chased it down. Hint: it is there, your client isn't showing it, and it is related to gpg support. Mutt doesn't show it (by default? I don't know if this can be changed). -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
