On Wednesday 08 March 2006 16:02, Craig White wrote: > On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 15:55 +0000, Anne Wilson wrote: > > On Wednesday 08 March 2006 14:37, Anthony Messina wrote: > > > Mike McCarty wrote: > > > >I'm getting them again. > > > > > > > >Mike > > > > > > Postfix client access file: > > > > > > uol.br.com REJECT Your anti-spam configuration creates more spam; \ > > > please fix it. > > > > Not all mail from uol.br.com is spam - I do get genuine mail that I want > > to keep, so my procmail recipe just says > > > > :0 > > > > * ^From: .*Antispam > > /dev/null> > > > > I never see them unless I look through the logs. Of course it does mean > > that they are downloaded before being dropped, but that's no big deal for > > me. > > ---- > no it's not a big deal for you and probably effective but I would > suggest that you recognize it is that type of behavior you are employing > that you are rebelling against...receiving messages that are summarily > sent to the giant bit bucket in the sky and the 'proper' way to handle > is to reject them at the outset. > > Obviously this simplifies things since mail to abuse@xxxxxxxxxx goes > unanswered and that is probably the larger crime but all in all, it's > bad form to simply bit bucket mail that you have received (though most > of us do that now). OTOH I don't clog up the Internet with messages that no-one wants. Anne
Attachment:
pgpGlXByXNMpu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
