After deleting this message from the spamtools folder, flist started
working again:
<<< snip >>>
From rtucker Mon Apr 20 15:01:31 1998
Return-Path: <rtucker>
Received: (from rtucker(_at_)localhost)
by crasher2.ttgcitn.com (8.9.0.Beta5/8.9.0.Beta5) id PAA32760
for rtucker(_at_)ttgcitn(_dot_)com; Mon, 20 Apr 1998 15:01:30 -0500
Received: from ivan.iecc.com (123(_at_)ivan(_dot_)iecc(_dot_)com
[205.238.207.65])
by crasher2.ttgcitn.com (8.9.0.Beta5/8.9.0.Beta5) with SMTP id PAA32745
for <rtucker(_at_)crasher2(_dot_)ttgcitn(_dot_)com>; Mon, 20 Apr 1998
15:01:22 -0500
Received: (qmail 27128 invoked by uid 85); 20 Apr 1998 19:58:28 -0000
Delivered-To: majordom-abusespamtools-out(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com
Received: (qmail 27119 invoked by uid 85); 20 Apr 1998 19:58:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 27114 invoked from network); 20 Apr 1998 19:58:25 -0000
Received: from ns0.cooper.net (195.10.99.10)
by ivan.iecc.com with SMTP; 20 Apr 1998 19:58:25 -0000
Received: from server3 (server3.cooper.net [195.10.99.3]) by ns0.cooper.net
(Rockliffe SMTPRA 2.1.5) with SMTP id
<B0000004447(_at_)ns0(_dot_)cooper(_dot_)net> for
<spamtools(_at_)abuse(_dot_)net>;
Mon, 20 Apr 1998 20:58:09 +0100
Message-ID: <011b01bd6c96$62f92030$03630ac3(_at_)server3(_dot_)cooper(_dot_)net>
From: "Adrian Cooper" <adrian(_at_)cooper(_dot_)net>
To: <spamtools(_at_)abuse(_dot_)net>
Subject: Re: [spamtools] Opt-out lists
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 20:56:19 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Sender: owner-spamtools(_at_)abuse(_dot_)net
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: spamtools(_at_)abuse(_dot_)net
X-SBG-processed: b497-ae21-8399-fdf4-b4ec-01a8-5779
X-Priority: 4 (Low)
-----Original Message-----
From: Clive D.W. Feather <clive(_at_)demon(_dot_)net>
Date: 20 April 1998 18:31
The basic assumption that you are allowed to add someone to a mailing
list without their consent is flawed.
This isn't the view of the rest of the world.
I am sure it is!
No-one is asked to opt-in to paper mailing lists or telephone lists. Are
you saying >it is flawed because of one of the other issues mentioned below,
or just as a >philosophical point ? If the latter, you'll lose in the real
world. I can tell you, based
on the discussions that I've already had, that the DM world will *not*
accept opt-in in email
Then they will quite rightly be treated for what they would become -
spammers.
because it implies that they must accept it in paper mail and telephones
and faxes >and ....
An extremely dangerous perception in my view and one that will cause them
considerable problems. The fact that people are "opted-in" to mailing lists
on other media without their consent, does not make the practice right or
any less inconvenient to those to whom it costs time and money to get
removed from these "nuisance" lists. With electronic media such as this it
is much easier to opt-in voluntarily than it is with the more traditional
media and is entirely the correct way of doing things. Assuming consent
until proven otherwise is asking for trouble IMO.
I am totally committed and will fight against "opt-out" email lists for
these reasons in favour of "opt-in", and with the greatest respect I would
not let the DMA pressure group walk over the fundamental rights of others
for their own convenience.
Adrian Cooper.
<<< snip >>>
Wonders never cease...
In any case, I have a uuencoded specimen of the above message, as well
as a copy of the core file as needed for dissection or what have you.
Hope this helps :-)
BTW... before I forget (I forgot in the original post), here's system
info:
Linux crasher2.ttgcitn.com 2.0.32 #2 Sat Jan 17 16:54:30 CST 1998 i586
RedHat 4.1
--
Ryan Tucker <rtucker(_at_)ttgcitn(_dot_)com> http://www.ttgcitn.com/~rtucker/
UIN: 1976881 finger rtucker(_at_)ttgcitn(_dot_)com for PGP pub key/contact info
If you think the problem is bad now, just wait until we've solved it.
-- Arthur Kasspe