[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet

2008-04-03 Thread James L. Sims
Please, keep it the way it's been, Tony. As I stated earlier, I value that dialog with the friends I've made on this list and future acquaintances that I'm sure will join. Jim Tony Sleep wrote: > On 03/04/2008 David J. Littleboy wrote: > >> Agreed. Take it off list. >> > > I'm done with it. It s

[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet

2008-04-03 Thread Peter Marquis-Kyle
On 3/04/2008 Tony Sleep wrote: > I'll do whichever, it's trivially easy to change the list operation. Tony, I think you should leave it as it is. It's not broken, as far as I can see. I think the silent majority appreciate your efforts to keep the conduit open for the (thinning) discussions, some

[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet

2008-04-03 Thread Tony Sleep
On 03/04/2008 David J. Littleboy wrote: > Agreed. Take it off list. I'm done with it. It stayed on because of the question of whether or not list members want their email addresses exposed to other list members, risking spam. If anyone has a view either way I would prefer it gets expressed on list

[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet

2008-04-03 Thread Bob Frost
Anonymous, > Spam filters are inconvenient Why? I get a couple of hundred spams a day and I simply use the built-in spam filter in Vista's Windows Mail; it is the best I have come across. It only misses about 1 in a 100, and takes out far fewer genuine emails, so a quick glance through the list