On 15 Feb, Professional Software Engineering wrote:
| [...]
| I am reminded of the unsolicited offer I received from spamarrest.com this
| past week to buy their anti-spam service.
Yeah. A PYLM scheme that someone on this list had configured to
auto-ack list posts in Sept of last year. IIRC, it used header From:
not envelope sender, so posters got the spew but the general list was
spared. At that time I added this to my access.db:
spamarrest.com 550 Go Away! I hate spam... and I hate this MORE
All the rest of my entries are simple 550 Access Denied, figuring
there's no point in going out of my way to antagonize the spammers and
invite a joe job. But this one really yanked me.
| [...] I'm sure you didn't mean to spam the procmail list, but to those
| who fight spam on a regular basis, your message strongly resembles spam.
| It is amazing that some people fail to recognize this in their enthusiasm
| to spread the word about a new endeavour.
Because in our world today the end justifies the means.
| [...]
| I might be alone in my belief, but I think I'll stick to the procmail list
| for my dose of procmail, and for where I lend my time to assist others with
| their procmail script writing.
I smell a flamefest coming. ;-)
<aol>
me too!
</aol>
| - Sean (still wishing people had to be a subscriber of procmail to post here)
Uhm, it is subscriber only. I have 2 messsages pending moderator
approval right now. One was a sloppy copy/paste of my throwaway address
that included an extra chracter, and the other was an attempt to use a
plussed address (with my subscribed address) in response to a post of
yours 9 days ago.
--
Email address in From: header is valid * but only for a couple of days *
This is my reluctant response to spammers' unrelenting address harvesting
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail