23 Jan
2004
23 Jan
'04
1:52 a.m.
On Jan 22, 15:50, Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
Reply-To
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Pete Turnbull wrote:
> On Jan 22, 12:15, Doc Shipley wrote:
> > On Jan 22, 2004, at 11:54 AM, Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
> > > (I'm going to pick you guys off one at a time until I've got
you
> > > all... ;)
> >
> > <cough>netcop<cough>
>
> Maybe we should all turn on our "Reply-To:" headers and see what
> happens. We could all set them to "vcf(a)siconic.com" so the results
can
be properly
monitored ;-)
Hey, that would be fun! Equally fun would be for me to modify my
.procmailrc to send any spam message I get to each individual addressed message I receive ;)
Oh! I hadn't thought of that :-(
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
23 Jan
23 Jan
5:36 a.m.
On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 07:52, Pete Turnbull wrote:
Oh! I hadn't thought of that :-(
Of course, we could configure our mailers to send all of our received
spam to Sellam on receipt of a message from him...
(Heh, this could go downhill very fast ;)
>
> Maybe we should all turn on our "Reply-To:" headers and see what
> happens. We could all set them to "vcf(a)siconic.com" so the results
can
be
properly monitored ;-)
Hey, that would be fun! Equally fun would be for me to modify my
.procmailrc to send any spam message I get to each individual Reply-To
addressed message I receive ;)
7656
days inactive
7656
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
julesrichardsonuk＠yahoo.co.uk -
pete＠dunnington.u-net.com