>There has indeed been a higher spam:ham ratio on this list of late,
>however making it subscriber-only won't help. The crims need only
>spoof the address of someone subscribed to the list to bypass that,
>and I suspect a few spammers have registered using false addresses
>anyway (leading to a bou
On 06/09/2013 11:21, Jerry wrote:
On Fri, 6 Sep 2013 09:32:39 +0100
Graham Todd articulated:
Isn't this pure SPAM?
Why yes it is. Would you prefer it mixed with non-spam to make it more
palatable?
Seriously, the ration of spam to non-spam is increasing exponentially
on this list. Until the mo
