Re: Fwd: Please confirm your message
On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 02:35:28PM +0100, Russell Coker wrote:
> The people who run such stupid filters misunderstand the way the
> Internet works.
Maybe you should do a short research on the user of this mail handling
program before saying such.
> If you have to send an extra confirmation message every time you send
> an email to someone you haven't communicated with before then it will
> increase the number of messages required by at least 50%. That is an
> unreasonable burden to place on other people.
I wrote the software primarily for ezmlm mailing lists, please rethink
your statement with this precondition.
On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 08:47:04AM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> Still too much. If someone initiates a communication, they should make
> sure they can get the reply.
Yes that's true. I usually do this. I'm not responsible for the
Reply-To header in my message, the BTS mangled the headers and resent
the message; and it still appears to be from me. I've set
Mail-Followup-To correctly. I'm not interested in receiving private
copies of mail in public discussions; I know where I post, and keep up
with, in this case, the bug's history, and read debian-devel. I've noted
that you two don't want to communicate with me, be it.
On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 02:35:28PM +0100, Russell Coker wrote:
> PS If a spam filter blocks a message about an NMU then don't complain
> about not being warned...
No. You receive a delivery notification, and you receive a bounce if the
delivery fails. You know that your message didn't reach the recipient.
On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 04:48:50PM +0100, Russell Coker wrote:
> For reference, I will not reply to such a message, but I will consider
> putting the entire domain in my spam filter if such messages continue.
This is what could cause it. 'Stupid' content based spam filters
delivering false positives to /dev/null. Neither the sender nor the
recipient know about the delivery failure.
Gerrit.
Reply to: