> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: vrijdag 3 december 2004 7:51
> To: SpamAssassin Users
> Subject: Re: What is up with surbl.org?
>
> >> Perhaps he should. Seriously, I heavily rely on the rating.
> >> cloudma
: 'Mark'; SURBL Discussion list (E-mail)
>>> Subject: RE: What is up with surbl.org?
>>>
>>> > How come surbl.org has a "Bad" status at rating.cloudmark.com? (see
>>> > below). This is not good.
>>> Perhaps Jeff should contact th
On Thursday, December 2, 2004, 1:14:33 PM, Mark Mark wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Chris Santerre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: donderdag 2 december 2004 21:56
>> To: 'Mark'; SURBL Discussion list (E-mail)
>> Subject: RE: What is up wi
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Santerre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: donderdag 2 december 2004 21:56
> To: 'Mark'; SURBL Discussion list (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: What is up with surbl.org?
>
> > How come surbl.org has a "Bad" status at ra
At 03:50 PM 12/2/2004, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
*** BEGIN PGP VERIFIED MESSAGE ***
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 08:42:34PM +, Mark wrote:
> How come surbl.org has a "Bad" status at rating.cloudmark.com? (see
> below). This is not good.
That's really a question for the Cloudmark people. My guess is th
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 08:42:34PM +, Mark wrote:
> How come surbl.org has a "Bad" status at rating.cloudmark.com? (see
> below). This is not good.
That's really a question for the Cloudmark people. My guess is that
domains that have mailing lists which talk about spam get a bad rating
since
How come surbl.org has a "Bad" status at rating.cloudmark.com? (see
below). This is not good.
- Mark
System Administrator Asarian-host.org
---
"If you were supposed to understand it,
we wouldn't call it code." - FedEx
asarian-host: {root} % dig surbl.org
