[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] Emails being tagged as spam -- NMH solution???
From: |
Andy Bradford |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] Emails being tagged as spam -- NMH solution??? |
Date: |
22 Feb 2015 12:16:58 -0700 |
Thus said Ralph Corderoy on Sun, 22 Feb 2015 19:07:06 +0000:
> You guess wrong. It is useful. I'm declaring what's valid and
> interested parties can use it, and I've seen they do, to help judge
> what they've received.
By the way, my apologies for using your domain as an example. I could
have just as easily setup a separate subdomain for this test. I was so
surprised to actually find a domain that used -all that I immediately
put on my ``for science'' hat and proceeded to test.
> Did Hotmail accept the message over SMTP, or also deliver it to your
> inbox? What was the detail of their spam judgement, e.g. based on
> its headers? (Using Hotmail as an arbiter of quality!? Would be
> interesting to hear what Gmail does.)
Yes, Hotmail accepted the message over SMTP from a non-approved IP
address and delivered it the Spam folder.
I'll conduct a better experiment later to see if there is a difference
in spam judgement.
> (BTW, fully-justified text to 72 characters on a TTY is a pain to
> read, especially when long `words' are common meaning every space has
> to be two spaces on some lines, presumably more sometimes.)
Interesting observation. I've always found it to be the opposite and
you're actually the first to have mentioned it. At least for me, I find
that having the text wrapped at odd places, or not wrapped at
all depending on the terminal/software displaying it, is much more
difficult.
Andy
--
TAI64 timestamp: 4000000054ea2b4d