We apparently can not filter this stuff --- can we make it a member only
list
Please,
Richard.
--
Richard Ames
linsup.com, +61 2 9144-6131
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
essage-
-=> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-=> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Ames
-=> Sent: Thursday, 11 September 2003 11:43 AM
-=> To: SLUG
-=> Subject: Members only (was [SLUG] Slug, Lisa sucks)
-=>
-=>
-=>
-=> We apparently can not filter thi
Richard Ames wrote:
>
> We apparently can not filter this stuff --- can we make it a member only
> list
I would be more interested in knowing why the filters haven't picked it
up by now. It seems that we had the same message about 5 (?) times .
Perhaps a reject before members only.
--
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 12:11:33PM +1000, Terry Collins wrote:
> I would be more interested in knowing why the filters haven't picked it
> up by now. It seems that we had the same message about 5 (?) times .
No, only twice, once each on slug and slug-chat, but they referred to
the same site as so
Well Im not a member of slug-chat and I have had that email about 5
times to the slug list...
Adam.
On Thu, 2003-09-11 at 10:38, John Clarke wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 12:11:33PM +1000, Terry Collins wrote:
>
> > I would be more interested in knowing why the filters haven't picked it
> > u
> Well Im not a member of slug-chat and I have had that email
> about 5 times to the slug list...
I can count at least 8 ( of this sort of spam ) from the main slug list
alone :)
---
Kind Regards,
Theo Julienne
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 10:40:55AM +0800, Adam Hewitt wrote:
> To: John Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Don't do this. Just send your reply to the list.
> Well Im not a member of slug-chat and I have had that email about 5
> times to the slug list...
Check the list archive. There was only one copy
Top posting is not bad, I'm all for it .. more top posting please,
I use pine, and I sometimes have a bloody slow link, having to scroll down
through pages of message to read one is annoying as crap, and yeah I know
people should trim their replies, but I use pine, and I sometimes have a
bloody s
Dave Airlie wrote:
for i = 1 to 3; do
> I use pine, and I sometimes have a bloody slow <--+
> link, having to scroll down through pages of |
> message to read one is annoying as crap,--+
done
Please dont get into this loop, I have just experienced a long thread on
comp.text.tex wh
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Dave Airlie wrote:
I hope that everyone has upgraded their Pine to v4.58 :)
Sorry for sending directly, as an ex-slug List-administrator, sometimes my
postings don't get posted, no idea why.. cheers!
> Top posting is not bad, I'm all for it .. more top posting please,
>
> I
If you're *really* concerned about top-posting, might I suggest you go
get a LIFE !!
-=> Top posting is not bad, I'm all for it .. more top posting please,
Not editing your messages, however, really fromages me off !!!
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://
This one time, at band camp, Richard Ames wrote:
>
>We apparently can not filter this stuff --- can we make it a member only
>list
I haven't received a single spam from the slug list since i installed
bogofilter between my mailbox and my mailserver.
http://spacepants.org/conf/dot.procmailrc
-=> This one time, at band camp, Richard Ames wrote:
-=> >
-=> >We apparently can not filter this stuff --- can we make it
-=> a member
-=> >only
-=> >list
-=>
-=> I haven't received a single spam from the slug list since i
-=> installed bogofilter between my mailbox and my mailserver.
-=>
This one time, at band camp, Jon Biddell wrote:
>While bogofilter is probably a damn ghood idea, it doesn't address the
>vast majority of users who probably have one machine connected to their
>ISP, and their spam email downloads count toewards there monthly limit.
bogofilter runs at the client en
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 03:55:39PM +1000, Jon Biddell wrote:
> I can see what Richard is saying - if we can't stop it at the source
> (i.e. the slug server), then you need something that can delete spam
What we don't know is how many spams the filters stopped. No filter is
perfect, but if they'v
On Thu, 2003-09-11 at 16:07, John Clarke wrote:
> What we don't know is how many spams the filters stopped. No filter is
> perfect, but if they've caught 99% then we really don't have any right
> to complain about the 1% that got though.
Thanks for some positive feedback. :-)
Last time I counted
personally, I don't see the problem with making it a hidden list.
However, there may be reasons for not doing so which all seem to ilude
me at the moment, but I only got 1 copy. but by the same token, I gotta
tell you, I ain't liking the porn spam much,
just my 2 cents worth
--
Shaun Oliver
"Beca
*SNIP*
Not editing your messages, however, really fromages me off
*SNIP*
I would have to agree.
thankfully, I use mutt which in my case due to my using speech,
I find that I can read a reply to one message and the text I've already
seen in a previous message isn't read out to me.
that afaik is a fe
18 matches
Mail list logo
