spam (was: Re: pric 31-Jan-2007)

Matthias Kirschner mk at
Fri Feb 2 21:44:54 UTC 2007

* Ben Finney <ben at> [2007-02-01 09:52:27 +1100]:

> On 31-Jan-2007, Matthias Kirschner wrote:
> > Does anyone know if it makes sense if I add
> > 
> > (it was always this) to mailman's privacy
> > options: 
> That's a treadmill that only ever gets faster. It would block that one
> host, but it would mean you need to maintain that field in Mailman
> from now on.
> I think that rejecting messages suspected as spam is better done by
> the receiving MTA, not later. That way, you've got the calling party
> on the line (so to speak) and you don't need to make a "generate a new
> message or drop this one on the floor" decision, you just reject it to
> the SMTP client.

Ok, than I will not do this.

Thank you,

Join the Fellowship and protect your freedom!      (

More information about the Discussion mailing list