On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Michael Geier wrote: [... original message elided by poster ...]
> Maybe some people are taking my recommendation a little to strongly. > > In answer to your points: > [1]If you belong to a list that does it, put them in your whitelist (in my > opinion, any list you belong to should be in a whitelist anyway). That's all nice and all, except that the main reason I use spamassassin is to get rid of spam that comes via mailing lists, which is the main way /I/ get spam. If you don't, that's nice. :) > [2] I frankly don't understand the point of that one... What, that marking messages as spam for people who can't get the replies any other way? That's a little harsh. I have worked in several situations where I /was/ one of these people, and where various people and systems who assumed that the "Reply-To" header was meaningless prevented me seeing any response... > [3] If people need control over where the replies are sent, is it > impossible to have the original message sent from the same domain? Yes. It's impossible for me to make the addresses, say, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, be at the same domain. > Whoever heard of a mail server you could retrieve from, but couldn't > send from, I have, and that's half the point of the objection. I know people who need this and use it daily, and I have worked in that situation. > or at least that SMTP and POP3/IMAP weren't in the same domain? I often send mail from one domain, through an SMTP server there, and access email delivered to another. Really. Daniel -- The world would be a better place if Larry Wall had been born in Iceland, or any other country where the native language actually has syntax. -- Peter da Silva _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk