Re: Speaking of filtering, was Research-y (IPv6)

>I'm going to have one more go at sending email to this list to determine
>if the list owner has finally fixed the censoring block (it's hardly
>"anti-spam" if it discards irrespective of content) -- which means that
>everything I have tried to say so far has been discarded...

Well, here's a question.  Richard was sending mail from Demon, which a
long time ago was squeaky clean, but in recent years has sent 100%
spam to my network until a few messages he tried to send last week.
(I have logs.)

It's a wide range of spam. One recent example was some sort of
religious press release sent to an address that sorta kinda used to be
OK and was on some 1995 list of editors, but has been rejecting mail
for many years.  A lot of it is 419 spam.  But other than his
messages, it's all been spam.

So how do I tell the 100% spam sources that might turn out to be
99.98% spam sources and leak a real message or two from the 100% spam
sources that won't?

PS: One of them had this transcendant hash buster:

Most shadows believe that inside squid borrow money from near bubble
bath.Any cigar can secretly admire globule of, but it takes a real
mortician to bartender related to.When you see beyond girl scout, it
means that coward inside daydreams.Unlike so many necromancers who
have made their gratifying customer to us.Still teach her from movie
theater behind, assimilate her from sheriff with plaintiff of cashier.

-
This is the asrg mailing list.  To change your subscription settings, see
http://lists.services.net/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr/domain=lists.gurus.org