Re: Returning from "vacation". (MIA?)
On Wed, 14 May 2003 23:17:07 +0200, Matthias Urlichs <smurf@smurf.noris.de> said:
> Hi, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>> FWIW, if they are only sent in reply to "spam status dubious"
>>> messages, I wouldn't call them obnoxious.
>>
>> I am not sure I understand. If such a message is sent to me, I
>> certainly find them obnoxious.
> That's why I said "I". Personal tastes differ, but so do individual
> tolerance levels.
> My system will (as soon as I get around to actually finish setting
> it up) say something along the lines of
> "Hello. My spam protection system is unsure about your
> message. Since you're reading this, your email isn't spam ;-) --
> please either sign your emails to me, or send a short confirmation
> to the address <my name>-abqux at <domain> so that and your mails
> will be whitelisted. Sorry about this, but there's no other way."
> I fail to see how a text like that can be called obnoxious, but
> that's just me.
I would. If I ever get a message like that, I would be
grateful -- It'll allow me to add yet another obnoxious auto-reply to
my spam filters. Rest assured you shall never get email from me, or
any official posiiton I may happen to hold while your filter is in
place.
manoj
--
"Observe that for the programmer, as for the chef, the urgency of the
patron may govern the scheduled completion of the task, but it cannot
govern the actual completion. An omelette, promised in two minutes,
may appear to be progressing nicely. But when it has not set in two
minutes, the customer has two choices -- wait or eat it raw. Software
customers have had the same choices." Frederick P. Brooks, Jr, _The
Mythical Man-Month_
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: