richiesta ordine (fwd)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
29 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

richiesta ordine (fwd)

Dave Horsfall
Have you idiots ever thought of implementing some simple anti-spam
measures?  I have offered my services (free) many times, but thus far have
been ignored, so I can only assume that you lot are spam-supporters.

Am I right?  As it happens, I am in the middle of upgrading a Penguin box;
all you have to do is say the word, and it'll run FreeBSD instead.

-- Dave

Ciao,
Sono Marina ti scrivo da Instamore, il sito numero 1 in italia per acquistare i tuoi followers Instagram.
E' semplicissimo grazie al nostro servizio aumentare SUBITO i tuoi followers, non hai nessun vincolo e non c'è nessun abbonamento.

Vai su http://bit.ly/FollowerPerInstagram e inserisci il codice sconto "OFF10", avrai lo sconto del 10% su qualsiasi ordine!

Oggi non serve essere famosi per avere migliaia di followers, scegli Instamore e aumenta SUBITO i fan del tuo profilo aziendale o privato!
Resto in attesa del tuo ordine
Buon week end

Marina

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [spam subject elided] (fwd)

Marvin Renich
* Dave Horsfall <[hidden email]> [181202 17:58]:
> Have you idiots ever thought of implementing some simple anti-spam measures?
> I have offered my services (free) many times, but thus far have been
> ignored, so I can only assume that you lot are spam-supporters.
>
> Am I right?  As it happens, I am in the middle of upgrading a Penguin box;
> all you have to do is say the word, and it'll run FreeBSD instead.

First, calling people names on this list is not acceptable behavior.

Second, you addressed the message to the list, not the list masters, so
you just called everyone on this list an idiot, even though almost no
one on this list has any direct control over the anti-spam measures in
place.  The list masters are unlikely to be subscribed to every Debian
mailing list, as they are a relatively small group that administers all
the official @lists.debian.org lists.  To find their email address, go
to https://lists.debian.org/ (and note they likely did not see any of
your previous offers of help).

Third, the list masters are professional and expert email
administrators, and they volunteer their time to run the Debian mailing
lists.  Characterizing them as idiots is not only extremely rude, but as
far from the truth as you can get.

Fourth, calling someone names is not an effective way to get them to
want to help you.

Fifth, there are substantial anti-spam measures in place, as evidenced
by the fact that extremely few spam messages actually get through.
Without any anti-spam measures, you would not be able to find the
legitimate email messages due to the quantity of spam.

Sixth, if you go to https://lists.debian.org/debian-laptop/ and find the
email, you can click on the "Report as spam" button.  This is a big help
to the list masters.

Seventh, the list masters welcome suggestions for spamassassin rules
(and other changes).  There was a recent message on [hidden email]
giving a hint how to do that, but I'm not motivated to go find it for
you.  I believe it was last month; you can search the archives.

Eighth, _why_ did you quote the spam message?  If you have enough
expertise in anti-spam measures to be offering your assistance, you
ought to know that including the spam content in a legitimate email
makes it much more difficult to train any Bayesian filters in place.

...Marvin

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [spam subject elided] (fwd)

eamanu15 .
Dave,

I think first of all, that you must take care the language used here. If you have the knowledge
to avoid the spams, maybe you have to work on the solution, talking with DD instead "offer your
services".

El dom., 2 de dic. de 2018 a la(s) 22:10, Marvin Renich ([hidden email]) escribió:
* Dave Horsfall <[hidden email]> [181202 17:58]:
> Have you idiots ever thought of implementing some simple anti-spam measures?
> I have offered my services (free) many times, but thus far have been
> ignored, so I can only assume that you lot are spam-supporters.
>
> Am I right?  As it happens, I am in the middle of upgrading a Penguin box;
> all you have to do is say the word, and it'll run FreeBSD instead.

First, calling people names on this list is not acceptable behavior.

Second, you addressed the message to the list, not the list masters, so
you just called everyone on this list an idiot, even though almost no
one on this list has any direct control over the anti-spam measures in
place.  The list masters are unlikely to be subscribed to every Debian
mailing list, as they are a relatively small group that administers all
the official @lists.debian.org lists.  To find their email address, go
to https://lists.debian.org/ (and note they likely did not see any of
your previous offers of help).

Third, the list masters are professional and expert email
administrators, and they volunteer their time to run the Debian mailing
lists.  Characterizing them as idiots is not only extremely rude, but as
far from the truth as you can get.

Fourth, calling someone names is not an effective way to get them to
want to help you.

Fifth, there are substantial anti-spam measures in place, as evidenced
by the fact that extremely few spam messages actually get through.
Without any anti-spam measures, you would not be able to find the
legitimate email messages due to the quantity of spam.

Sixth, if you go to https://lists.debian.org/debian-laptop/ and find the
email, you can click on the "Report as spam" button.  This is a big help
to the list masters.

Seventh, the list masters welcome suggestions for spamassassin rules
(and other changes).  There was a recent message on [hidden email]
giving a hint how to do that, but I'm not motivated to go find it for
you.  I believe it was last month; you can search the archives.

Eighth, _why_ did you quote the spam message?  If you have enough
expertise in anti-spam measures to be offering your assistance, you
ought to know that including the spam content in a legitimate email
makes it much more difficult to train any Bayesian filters in place.

...Marvin



--
Arias Emmanuel
Github/Gitlab; @eamanu
Debian: @eamanu-guest
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: richiesta ordine (fwd)

Eric S Fraga
In reply to this post by Dave Horsfall
On Monday,  3 Dec 2018 at 09:57, Dave Horsfall wrote:
> Have you idiots ever thought of implementing some simple anti-spam

Have you ever learned how to behave in polite company?

--
Eric S Fraga via Emacs 27.0.50 & org 9.1.14 on Debian buster/sid

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: richiesta ordine (fwd)

Andreas Schindler-3
In reply to this post by Dave Horsfall
Dave,

first of all: we don't appreciate help by someone calling us idiots.

If you argue about spam solutions, you better take a look at
spamassassin & friends, which BTW are part of every Debian distro, and
provide for real sophisticated professional anti-spam, before you offer
your ridiculous 'solution' to the list accompanied by disgusting insults.

To the list moderator: How about banning Dave from the list? There was a
similar case recently with the freeradius list and banning the offending
person was quite a success.

Dr. Andreas Schindler
E-Mail: [hidden email]

On 02.12.18 23:57, Dave Horsfall wrote:
> Have you idiots ever thought of implementing some simple anti-spam
> measures?  I have offered my services (free) many times, but thus far
> have been ignored, so I can only assume that you lot are spam-supporters.
>
> Am I right?  As it happens, I am in the middle of upgrading a Penguin
> box; all you have to do is say the word, and it'll run FreeBSD instead.
>
> -- Dave


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: richiesta ordine (fwd)

Jim Popovitch-3
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 20:17 +0100, Andreas Schindler wrote:
>
> To the list moderator: How about banning Dave from the list? There was
> a similar case recently with the freeradius list and banning the
> offending person was quite a success.

Silence the messenger?   While Dave's frustration seemed to have gotten
the best of him, he does still have a very legitimate point.  The Debian
lists do a piss poor job of blocking very obvious spam.  Piss poor job.

If your banning people for pointing out, for several years now, an
obvious problem, then ban me too.

-Jim P.

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: richiesta ordine (fwd)

Tao, Tchie
I think the objections are to his tone.

On Mon, Dec 3, 2018, 11:51 Jim Popovitch <[hidden email] wrote:
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 20:17 +0100, Andreas Schindler wrote:
>
> To the list moderator: How about banning Dave from the list? There was
> a similar case recently with the freeradius list and banning the
> offending person was quite a success.

Silence the messenger?   While Dave's frustration seemed to have gotten
the best of him, he does still have a very legitimate point.  The Debian
lists do a piss poor job of blocking very obvious spam.  Piss poor job.

If your banning people for pointing out, for several years now, an
obvious problem, then ban me too.

-Jim P.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: richiesta ordine (fwd)

Jim Popovitch-3
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 11:52 -0800, Tao, Tchie wrote:
> I think the objections are to his tone.

Well there are those here who would find fierce objections to top
posting... ;-)

That aside, I do think it's time for pitchforks+torches wrt the spam
emanating bendel.debian.org.  Dave's tone is warranted for a problem
that has persisted, and continues to be nonchalantly addressed.  

Yes, I know there are buttons to report spam that ends up in the d.o
archives, but that is NOT a solution for spam that bendel.debian.org
sends to Dave, me, and everyone else.

-Jim P.

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: richiesta ordine (fwd)

Tao, Tchie
Perhaps someday he might learn to express his frustrations in some sort of constructive fashion rather than insulting folks and throwing a childish tantrum?

On Mon, Dec 3, 2018, 12:04 Jim Popovitch <[hidden email] wrote:
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 11:52 -0800, Tao, Tchie wrote:
> I think the objections are to his tone.

Well there are those here who would find fierce objections to top
posting... ;-)

That aside, I do think it's time for pitchforks+torches wrt the spam
emanating bendel.debian.org.  Dave's tone is warranted for a problem
that has persisted, and continues to be nonchalantly addressed.  

Yes, I know there are buttons to report spam that ends up in the d.o
archives, but that is NOT a solution for spam that bendel.debian.org
sends to Dave, me, and everyone else.

-Jim P.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: richiesta ordine (fwd)

Jim Popovitch-3
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 12:07 -0800, Tao, Tchie wrote:
> Perhaps someday he might learn to express his frustrations in some
> sort of constructive fashion rather than insulting folks and throwing
> a childish tantrum?

And perhaps someday the spammers will learn to respect others... but I'm
not holding my breath.

How long should Dave wait out the problem before insulting folks?  1
month, 2 months, 6 months, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 25 years?   At
what point should constructive feedback yield to insults, and at what
point should insults yield to violence?

If your answer to that last question is "never", then I suggest you
study some history.  ;-)

-Jim P.

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: richiesta ordine (fwd)

Alexander Wirt
On Mon, 03 Dec 2018, Jim Popovitch wrote:

> On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 12:07 -0800, Tao, Tchie wrote:
> > Perhaps someday he might learn to express his frustrations in some
> > sort of constructive fashion rather than insulting folks and throwing
> > a childish tantrum?
>
> And perhaps someday the spammers will learn to respect others... but I'm
> not holding my breath.
>
> How long should Dave wait out the problem before insulting folks?  1
> month, 2 months, 6 months, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 25 years?   At
> what point should constructive feedback yield to insults, and at what
> point should insults yield to violence?
>
> If your answer to that last question is "never", then I suggest you
> study some history.  ;-)
I never got any patch of you for our anti spam measures, neither do I got
something from Dave.

Alex - Debian Listmaster


signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: richiesta ordine (fwd)

Jim Popovitch-3
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 21:38 +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> I never got any patch of you for our anti spam measures, neither do I
> got something from Dave. 
>
> Alex - Debian Listmaster

Patch?   I think you've identified the problem.

A start would be to tighten or remove any out-of-the box changes made to
spamassassin. Let's be clear, your current setup only set a score of 2
for an email that:

1) contained a shortened URL
2) was From: a freemail address
3) fails SPF for outlook.it
4) contains blacklisted received headers (ZEN, PBL, Barraacuda)
5) promotes Instagram to a technical laptop discussion list.

That email should have scored at least a 5 or 6 in stock Spamassassin
rules.

Further, email headers show you have Amavis with a threshold score of
5.3 and Spamassasin with a threshold of 4.0.  Which one will "win"?

But really, you would be better served by just enabling some RBL checks
in Spamassassin and getting rid of Amavis.

-Jim P.

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: richiesta ordine (fwd)

Alexander Wirt
On Mon, 03 Dec 2018, Jim Popovitch wrote:

> On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 21:38 +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> > I never got any patch of you for our anti spam measures, neither do I
> > got something from Dave. 
> >
> > Alex - Debian Listmaster
>
> Patch?   I think you've identified the problem.
>
> A start would be to tighten or remove any out-of-the box changes made to
> spamassassin. Let's be clear, your current setup only set a score of 2
> for an email that:
>
> 1) contained a shortened URL
> 2) was From: a freemail address
> 3) fails SPF for outlook.it
> 4) contains blacklisted received headers (ZEN, PBL, Barraacuda)
> 5) promotes Instagram to a technical laptop discussion list.
>
> That email should have scored at least a 5 or 6 in stock Spamassassin
> rules.
We can give it a try, just for this list. But tbh, you have really no idea
how much spam we catch.

>
> Further, email headers show you have Amavis with a threshold score of
> 5.3 and Spamassasin with a threshold of 4.0.  Which one will "win"?
>
> But really, you would be better served by just enabling some RBL checks
> in Spamassassin and getting rid of Amavis.
Getting rid of amavis wouldn't change anything.
We would still call SA.



signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: richiesta ordine (fwd)

Jim Popovitch-3
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:05 +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:

> On Mon, 03 Dec 2018, Jim Popovitch wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 21:38 +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> > > I never got any patch of you for our anti spam measures, neither
> > > do I
> > > got something from Dave. 
> > >
> > > Alex - Debian Listmaster
> >
> > Patch?   I think you've identified the problem.
> >
> > A start would be to tighten or remove any out-of-the box changes
> > made to
> > spamassassin. Let's be clear, your current setup only set a score of
> > 2
> > for an email that:
> >
> > 1) contained a shortened URL
> > 2) was From: a freemail address
> > 3) fails SPF for outlook.it
> > 4) contains blacklisted received headers (ZEN, PBL, Barraacuda)
> > 5) promotes Instagram to a technical laptop discussion list.
> >
> > That email should have scored at least a 5 or 6 in stock
> > Spamassassin
> > rules.
>
> We can give it a try, just for this list. But tbh, you have really no
> idea how much spam we catch.
That's good, and Thank you for that.

> >
> > Further, email headers show you have Amavis with a threshold score
> > of 5.3 and Spamassasin with a threshold of 4.0.  Which one will
> > "win"?
> >
> > But really, you would be better served by just enabling some RBL
> > checks in Spamassassin and getting rid of Amavis.
>
> Getting rid of amavis wouldn't change anything. 
> We would still call SA. 
Why involve Amavis then?  If it's not being used, then it's just another
potential point of failure in the mail process.

-Jim P.


signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: richiesta ordine (fwd)

Alexander Wirt
On Mon, 03 Dec 2018, Jim Popovitch wrote:

> On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:05 +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> > On Mon, 03 Dec 2018, Jim Popovitch wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 21:38 +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> > > > I never got any patch of you for our anti spam measures, neither
> > > > do I
> > > > got something from Dave. 
> > > >
> > > > Alex - Debian Listmaster
> > >
> > > Patch?   I think you've identified the problem.
> > >
> > > A start would be to tighten or remove any out-of-the box changes
> > > made to
> > > spamassassin. Let's be clear, your current setup only set a score of
> > > 2
> > > for an email that:
> > >
> > > 1) contained a shortened URL
> > > 2) was From: a freemail address
> > > 3) fails SPF for outlook.it
> > > 4) contains blacklisted received headers (ZEN, PBL, Barraacuda)
> > > 5) promotes Instagram to a technical laptop discussion list.
> > >
> > > That email should have scored at least a 5 or 6 in stock
> > > Spamassassin
> > > rules.
> >
> > We can give it a try, just for this list. But tbh, you have really no
> > idea how much spam we catch.
>
> That's good, and Thank you for that.
>
> > >
> > > Further, email headers show you have Amavis with a threshold score
> > > of 5.3 and Spamassasin with a threshold of 4.0.  Which one will
> > > "win"?
> > >
> > > But really, you would be better served by just enabling some RBL
> > > checks in Spamassassin and getting rid of Amavis.
> >
> > Getting rid of amavis wouldn't change anything. 
> > We would still call SA. 
>
> Why involve Amavis then?  If it's not being used, then it's just another
> potential point of failure in the mail process.
it is used for several things, like a viruscanner, language specific
spamassassin sets and some other things. Removing it wouldn't get you better
SA results.

Alex


signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [spam subject elided] (fwd)

Marvin Renich
In reply to this post by Jim Popovitch-3
* Jim Popovitch <[hidden email]> [181203 15:21]:
> How long should Dave wait out the problem before insulting folks?  1
> month, 2 months, 6 months, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 25 years?

The correct answer is "much longer than 25 years".

> At
> what point should constructive feedback yield to insults, and at what
> point should insults yield to violence?

Never, to both parts of that question.

> If your answer to that last question is "never", then I suggest you
> study some history.  ;-)

Are you saying that because others have, in the past, resorted to
violence that it becomes justifiable?  Over an offer to help that was
sent to the wrong place and was thus not answered?  Sorry, that is just
plain wrong.

Alex:

Many thanks to you and the rest of the listmaster team for the
excellent work you do.  And also for your calm response in the face of
extremely rude and unfounded emails directed at you.

...Marvin

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [spam subject elided] (fwd)

Jim Popovitch-3
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:33 -0500, Marvin Renich wrote:
> Are you saying that because others have, in the past, resorted to
> violence that it becomes justifiable?  

No, I'm saying lessons learned from History are to always be respected
and not ignored.

> Over an offer to help that was sent to the wrong place and was thus
> not answered?  

Context, it's always important.  The offerS have been given by several
people, over several years, across several methods.  I know Dave, I have
a reasonable idea of how Dave would have make his first, second, third,
fourth, fifth, and sixth offers to help.  I can also imagine that it
probably took Dave at least several years, of offering *free* help,
before he blew a gasket at the continuance of a problem that he is very
keenly aware of how to solve.  I, on a parallel plane, have been
advocating for improvements, and complaining about the spam problem, for
several years now too.  I'll make a prediction, nothing will improve and
obvious spam will still leak through b.d.o.  At some point though,
receivers will start blocking b.d.o, they do it now selectively for some
 servers in the large outbound server farms of Hotmail, Google, AOL,
etc., what's Debian going to do when their single outbound b.d.o server
ends up listed on a few DNSBLs?

> Sorry, that is just plain wrong.

Which part?  The part about context mattering?

-Jim P.


signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [spam subject elided] (fwd)

Imre Vida-5

Guys,

could you please just stop.
The verbal attack was not justified - and can not be justified,
even if there are/were some perceived problems.

Human history is dominated by unfair aggression, but again:
it does not and can not justify any aggression.

Much appreciation to Debian and Debian-list maintainers
for their dedicated and silent work - that we can use and
enjoy their products!
Many thanks,

imre


Jim Popovitch wrote on 2018/12/04 05:56:

> On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:33 -0500, Marvin Renich wrote:
>> Are you saying that because others have, in the past, resorted to
>> violence that it becomes justifiable?  
>
> No, I'm saying lessons learned from History are to always be respected
> and not ignored.
>
>> Over an offer to help that was sent to the wrong place and was thus
>> not answered?  
>
> Context, it's always important.  The offerS have been given by several
> people, over several years, across several methods.  I know Dave, I have
> a reasonable idea of how Dave would have make his first, second, third,
> fourth, fifth, and sixth offers to help.  I can also imagine that it
> probably took Dave at least several years, of offering *free* help,
> before he blew a gasket at the continuance of a problem that he is very
> keenly aware of how to solve.  I, on a parallel plane, have been
> advocating for improvements, and complaining about the spam problem, for
> several years now too.  I'll make a prediction, nothing will improve and
> obvious spam will still leak through b.d.o.  At some point though,
> receivers will start blocking b.d.o, they do it now selectively for some
> servers in the large outbound server farms of Hotmail, Google, AOL,
> etc., what's Debian going to do when their single outbound b.d.o server
> ends up listed on a few DNSBLs?
>
>> Sorry, that is just plain wrong.
>
> Which part?  The part about context mattering?
>
> -Jim P.
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [spam subject elided] (fwd)

Alexander Wirt
In reply to this post by Marvin Renich
On Mon, 03 Dec 2018, Marvin Renich wrote:

> * Jim Popovitch <[hidden email]> [181203 15:21]:
> > How long should Dave wait out the problem before insulting folks?  1
> > month, 2 months, 6 months, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 25 years?
>
> The correct answer is "much longer than 25 years".
He should at least wait until he gets its facts right. Afair/afaik there
never was any offer to help or constructive help we received from him.

Alex
 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Thank you (was: Re: [spam subject elided] (fwd))

Martin Steigerwald
Dear Alex, dear Dave, dear everyone.

Alexander Wirt - 04.12.18, 07:47:

> On Mon, 03 Dec 2018, Marvin Renich wrote:
> > * Jim Popovitch <[hidden email]> [181203 15:21]:
> > > How long should Dave wait out the problem before insulting folks?
> > > 1
> > > month, 2 months, 6 months, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 25 years?
> >
> > The correct answer is "much longer than 25 years".
>
> He should at least wait until he gets its facts right. Afair/afaik
> there never was any offer to help or constructive help we received
> from him.

First off: Alex, thank you very much for your persistent and continued
dedication to serve the project and all of us discussing on Debian
mailinglists as a listmaster. I imagine that it can be challenging to
deal with negativity like this.

Now some random thoughts about this:

Regarding spam there for me there is one most important rule: Never
*ever* reply to spam, and never *ever* do so publicly. Why? In case of
answering privately you tell the spam sender that your mail address
exists or in case of forged from address to tell that to some other
random account. In the case of responding publicly you *highlight* the
spam.

I am highly successful with a Postscreen and rspamd based Spam-filtering
setup and I did not see the original spam at all. My mail server just
refused to receive it. Replying to the spam publicly just caused me to
see it as well and so was in dis-service for me. Recently I did not even
need any additional rules after having blocked whole domains of a mail
provider with dubious domain names after they insulted me for sending
them abuse complaints. But its mostly just my mail, I do not have the
responsibility for anyone else. So I can afford to make it more
aggressive and take a greater risk regarding false positives.

While I see rspamd as a very viable alternative to my previous Spam-
filtering setup, I am currently focused on other things than to offer
help to the listmasters. But then I accept and am grateful for all I
receive. Also I see the challenge to change the an existing setup,
especially when it is as large-scale as I'd expect the existing setup
for these mailing lists.

That written: I also complained to listmasters about a certain repeated
spam mail that appeared on almost every Debian mailing list I was
subscribed to and was not acted upon. However I learned that I am much
more at peace of mind if I just block it first with my mail server… and
then notify listmasters in a friendly and constructive way. Cause then I
do not give my power away and make my own peace of mind dependent on
what listmasters may or may not do about it.

Listmasters volunteer. They owe me *nothing*. They have a life outside
of volunteering as a listmaster.

All they give, they give freely without asking anything in return.

The most appropriate reaction to this in my eyes is gratefulness.

So again: Thank you, Alex, thank you, all listmasters for your time,
your dedication and even that you put up with all the negativity that
people who complain (including me as I did it) send towards you. I
commit to stop complaining and to start helping where I can, and even if
its just by reporting the spam mail via the web interface.

Of course I know not everyone has their own mail server, but Dave, if
you are proficient with anti spam measures and run your own mail server…
why are you even affected? My anti spam measures, and I am certainly not
an expert in this, blocked the original mail just fine. So if you do not
like to spend the time to help listmasters, how about you just fix your
own mail server not to accept mails like this in you are so proficient
with anti spam measures?

Thanks,
--
Martin


12