On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 03:15:04PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote: > > Spambouncer and spamassasin are great tools, and they rarely produce false > > positives. But where bandwidth is limited through technical or financial > > hurdles, they're not enough. > > Nothing will protect you from this; as noted, the information is available > elsewhere on Debian's website, as well. If it is a financial burden, then > the only useful method of appeal is probably through legal redress (either > legislative or judiciary, depending on your system; some may support forms > of executive as well :) Well in the US, I suppose the wrong person was elected. Our real choices were between the guy who invented the internet and some clown who wonders why the TV in his office has a typewriter in front of it. The latter won, so there's no chance of executive intervention I think. ;) > Seriously - hiding from it only delays matters, and not that long. I have > addresses that have *never* been published, anywhere; their sole purpose > is to spam-trap. And they get multiple spams, every day. True, but the fewer webpages advertise my email address, the less spam I get. This is generally a good thing. -- Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@bluecherry.net> Goldfish don't bounce <doogie> there is one bad thing about having a cell phone. <doogie> I can be reached at any time. :| <wmono> that's why I leave mine off at all times. ;>
Attachment:
pgp6xye_t8tbn.pgp
Description: PGP signature