• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: [OT] Verification required for ... protected by 0Spam.com.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [OT] Verification required for ... protected by 0Spam.com.


  • Subject: Re: [OT] Verification required for ... protected by 0Spam.com.
  • From: Walter Ian Kaye <email@hidden>
  • Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 21:17:54 -0800

At 08:28p -0700 12/16/2003, Gnarlodious didst inscribe upon an electronic papyrus:

Entity Gary Lists spoke thus:

> Should we want to verify? Should we just ignore these messages?
Certainly not. I have personal friends that I verify for but any old
insignificant listee is not worth it, they simply won't receive the
duplicate is all.

Duplicate? Duplicate? What do you mean, duplicate? Are you sending dupes?
What they won't receive is the list itself. From is From, not Sender.

If this trend continues I may need to filter these bounced mails since I
don't want them in my inbox.

Yeah, I think I may do likewise.
I'm anti-spam, but I'm also anti-crap. LOL

If they forget to whitelist, it's *their* responsibility to rectify the situation.

My suggestion: Forward the challenge/verification email to the anti-spam service, instead of the individual. If they get enough forwards, perhaps they'll contact their customer with information about how to whitelist.


-boo
do not cc me; i delete dupes and would prefer not to receive them at all.
_______________________________________________
applescript-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/applescript-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.

References: 
 >Re: [OT] Verification required for ... protected by 0Spam.com. (From: Gnarlodious <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Quark conflicting properties (revisited)
  • Next by Date: Re: Elementary file naming question
  • Previous by thread: Re: [OT] Verification required for ... protected by 0Spam.com.
  • Next by thread: Re: [OT] Verification required for ... protected by 0Spam.com.
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread