On Thu, 4 Dec 2014, Noel Butler wrote:
On 04/12/2014 00:54, Christian Grunfeld wrote:
"....It would be very rare, and if so you would ever more rare CC the
entire list of addresses on your spam message -
sure this was a lot more common in years gone by, but I've not seen any
such evidence of it in almost 10 years, and if
you did, well, that's not my problem, its the problem of your provider
who obviously doesn't care enough to educate its
users of the dangers of spam, period......"
lol ! ! ! is it possible to educate users against spam?
if that were the case this list would not be needed and we would be free
ourselves from reading your posts, period !
you must be doing it wrong, the users of today are far wiser than they were 5
years ago, even my almost 80yo dad knows to handle
spam, although its hard to do, get your users to *read* their welcome emails,
and dont have a lawyer write the stuff, write it so an
10yo kid can understand it, its also rare spam gets passed SA anyway with our
myriad of custom rules, and we block at MTA level from
multiple DNSBL's amongst many other milter tricks which I'm not going into in a
public forum :)
So educate them well, and let SA do its job, and we wouldnt need to read your
posts either.
I have to agree with Dave, Christian, et-all. It's not frequent but not
rare to see a reply-all "Take me off this list!!!".
Even if you've got the smartest, best educated users who will never make
that mistake and a totally perfect spam filtering system that never has a
FN there are other people/systems in the world which may be on that
"shotgun" spam recpient list which may be less than perfect.
--
Dave Funk University of Iowa
<dbfunk (at) engineering.uiowa.edu> College of Engineering
319/335-5751 FAX: 319/384-0549 1256 Seamans Center
Sys_admin/Postmaster/cell_admin Iowa City, IA 52242-1527
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Better is not better, 'standard' is better. B{
