You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net> on 2014/10/01 10:12:23 UTC
Re: half-OT: please remove spam-markers from subjects
Am 30.09.2014 um 18:12 schrieb jdebert:
> On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 19:19:10 +0200
> Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net> wrote:
>>
>> Am 29.09.2014 um 19:14 schrieb Nels Lindquist:
>>> On 9/29/2014 10:54 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>
>>>> please remove markers like [SPAM] if a mesage was flagged before
>>>> reply - they lead often that a message goes to junk- instead the
>>>> list-folder :-)
>>>
>>> Please teach your users to filter on the List-ID: header rather than
>>> Subject: for this list. The issue can be entirely avoided without
>>> requiring everyone else in the world to alter their behaviour
>>
>> the [SPAM] marker comes *before* all other sieve-filters
>> otherwise it would not catch faked From-Headers
>>
>> it's not a big deal but i see that mistake sometimes
>> also in business communication - not real good
>
> I do not see any subject lines in this thread with [SPAM] in them. I
> rarely see them in this list at all. (I suspect people are aware it can
> cause some poorer filtering implementations to delete them.)
so what - this was a new thread to not hijack others
> Perhaps you need to look closer to home for this problem?
for sure not if it appears in the middle of subjects
> Meantime, it is highly recommended that, if someone subscribes to a
> list about spam, one MUST make an exception to their filtering rules as
> previously mentioned. It's also very sensible. It is ridiculous to
> insist that people talking about spam stop using the word "spam"
the SA list has a -100 score
that won't change the fact that it is in general a bad
attitude not look at the subject of a mail someone
writes, but so be it until another flamewar starts
because some smart asses need to reply to a hint
wich needs no repsonse at all and was intended to
just point out a common mistake
Re: half-OT: please remove spam-markers from subjects
Posted by Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net>.
Am 04.10.2014 um 18:27 schrieb jdebert:
> My apologies. You are 100,000% correct about changing annoying
> behaviours.
thank you very much!
> I did not find the message you referred to, perhaps because
> of a forgotten convenience filter that strips nuisance tags
> from subjects
the intention was not to find a specific message and belittle somebody
or step in the middle of a thread while refer to something in the
subject since it's not only specific for a single message
frankly if i had imagined the storm happening after a short hint
finished with a smily i just had fixed my not perfect historic sieve
filter instead think "hmm if that happened now for me likely it does for
others too, maybe worth to point out"
Re: half-OT: please remove spam-markers from subjects
Posted by jdebert <jd...@garlic.com>.
My apologies. You are 100,000% correct about changing annoying
behaviours.
I did not find the message you referred to, perhaps because of a
forgotten convenience filter that strips nuisance tags from subjects.
Re: half-OT: please remove spam-markers from subjects
Posted by Dave Pooser <da...@pooserville.com>.
On 10/3/14 10:46 AM, "Nick Edwards" <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 10/3/14, Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net> wrote:
>>
>> Am 03.10.2014 um 12:56 schrieb Nick Edwards:
May I suggest the two of you either settle this with a machete fight
(offlist!) or by being the bigger person and *not responding* to each
other, including passive-agressive "I'm not speaking to him but would you
please tell him he's a big ol' poopy-head" comments?
Alternately, may I request a list moderator review the signal:noise ratio
associated with this feud and take appropriate action?
--
Dave Pooser
Cat-Herder-in-Chief, Pooserville.com
Re: [SA-Users] Re: half-OT: please remove spam-markers from subjects
Posted by "John R. Dennison" <jr...@gerdesas.com>.
Would it be possible for both of you to knock off this juvenile pissing
contest on a public mailing list? Please?
John
--
I for one welcome our new computer overlords.
-- Ken Jennings a former "Jeopardy!" quiz show champion, writing on his
video screen as he faced certain defeat by IBM's Watson computer.
Re: half-OT: please remove spam-markers from subjects
Posted by Anthony Cartmell <li...@fonant.com>.
Oh dear.
Please could you keep your arguments and name-calling off-list? It's not
nice seeing people being so unpleasant.
Thanks!
Anthony
--
www.fonant.com - Quality web sites
Tel. 01903 867 810
Fonant Ltd is registered in England and Wales, company No. 7006596
Registered office: Amelia House, Crescent Road, Worthing, West Sussex,
BN11 1QR
Re: half-OT: please remove spam-markers from subjects
Posted by Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net>.
Am 03.10.2014 um 17:46 schrieb Nick Edwards:
> thats funny, I could have sworn I replied and addressed to jdebert
if you refer to me you are not in the position to decide that
> oh lookie, so I did, you just cant help yourself fool, I think we know
> who the paranoid delusional stalker is reindl, get help, but no one
> here is qualified to give you the help you need, and might i remind
> you again dumb fuck, I was on this list a long time before you showed
> up here, so check hte definition of stalk
the point is that i never talked to you or care where you are
you permanently opening your mouth unasked everywhere in
my directtion
> you fruitcake, I warned you what would happen if you contact me
> again, what happens now is your own doing skitzo boy.
you are not in the position to warn anybody and i did not
contact you until you decdied to continue your attacks
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.mail.roundcube.user/4500
>>> Nick Edwards | 27 Sep 12:14 2014
>>> mind your own business , you dont get to play netcopper either
so don't you and we would have no problem at all
> On 10/3/14, Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net> wrote:
>>
>> Am 03.10.2014 um 12:56 schrieb Nick Edwards:
>>> jdebert, (since im not reply to the bully troll)
>>>
>>> he doesnt learn, worried about flame wars but kicks off by calling
>>> other people smart asses, just ignore him, most of the rest of the
>>> internet has done for a while
>>
>> creep away damned stalker - nobody asked you and the only smart
>> ass here is you - what was that with "don't write me again and
>> I wont have any need to abuse you back" below and how did you
>> treat roundcube developers and continue to abuse against me days
>> later each time you are bored and seek posts from me?
>>
>> Nick Edwards | 26 Sep 18:01 2014
>> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.mail.roundcube.user/4500
>>
>> -------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
>> Betreff: Re: [RCU] Time for new HTML Editor
>> Datum: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 21:14:43 +1000
>> Von: Nick Edwards <ni...@gmail.com>
>> An: Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net>
>>
>> you hate how im talking to you? good! now you know what it felt like
>> by all those newbies you belittle and bully, maybe you will think
>> twice about bullying them and coming over as a fucking dictator again
>> huh but probably not, nutters like you never learn.
>>
>> so you fuck off and dont write me again, and I wont have any need to
>> abuse you back.
>>
>> starting now, so if you want no contact you better fucking not reply
>>
>>> On 10/1/14, Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net> wrote:
>>>> Am 30.09.2014 um 18:12 schrieb jdebert:
>>>>> On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 19:19:10 +0200
>>>>> Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 29.09.2014 um 19:14 schrieb Nels Lindquist:
>>>>>>> On 9/29/2014 10:54 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> please remove markers like [SPAM] if a mesage was flagged before
>>>>>>>> reply - they lead often that a message goes to junk- instead the
>>>>>>>> list-folder :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please teach your users to filter on the List-ID: header rather than
>>>>>>> Subject: for this list. The issue can be entirely avoided without
>>>>>>> requiring everyone else in the world to alter their behaviour
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the [SPAM] marker comes *before* all other sieve-filters
>>>>>> otherwise it would not catch faked From-Headers
>>>>>>
>>>>>> it's not a big deal but i see that mistake sometimes
>>>>>> also in business communication - not real good
>>>>>
>>>>> I do not see any subject lines in this thread with [SPAM] in them. I
>>>>> rarely see them in this list at all. (I suspect people are aware it can
>>>>> cause some poorer filtering implementations to delete them.)
>>>>
>>>> so what - this was a new thread to not hijack others
>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps you need to look closer to home for this problem?
>>>>
>>>> for sure not if it appears in the middle of subjects
>>>>
>>>>> Meantime, it is highly recommended that, if someone subscribes to a
>>>>> list about spam, one MUST make an exception to their filtering rules as
>>>>> previously mentioned. It's also very sensible. It is ridiculous to
>>>>> insist that people talking about spam stop using the word "spam"
>>>>
>>>> the SA list has a -100 score
>>>>
>>>> that won't change the fact that it is in general a bad
>>>> attitude not look at the subject of a mail someone
>>>> writes, but so be it until another flamewar starts
>>>> because some smart asses need to reply to a hint
>>>> wich needs no repsonse at all and was intended to
>>>> just point out a common mistake
Re: half-OT: please remove spam-markers from subjects
Posted by Nick Edwards <ni...@gmail.com>.
thats funny, I could have sworn I replied and addressed to jdebert,
oh lookie, so I did, you just cant help yourself fool, I think we know
who the paranoid delusional stalker is reindl, get help, but no one
here is qualified to give you the help you need, and might i remind
you again dumb fuck, I was on this list a long time before you showed
up here, so check hte definition of stalk, you fruitcake, I warned you
what would happen if you contact me again, what happens now is your
own doing skitzo boy.
On 10/3/14, Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net> wrote:
>
> Am 03.10.2014 um 12:56 schrieb Nick Edwards:
>> jdebert, (since im not reply to the bully troll)
>>
>> he doesnt learn, worried about flame wars but kicks off by calling
>> other people smart asses, just ignore him, most of the rest of the
>> internet has done for a while
>
> creep away damned stalker - nobody asked you and the only smart
> ass here is you - what was that with "don't write me again and
> I wont have any need to abuse you back" below and how did you
> treat roundcube developers and continue to abuse against me days
> later each time you are bored and seek posts from me?
>
> Nick Edwards | 26 Sep 18:01 2014
> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.mail.roundcube.user/4500
>
> -------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
> Betreff: Re: [RCU] Time for new HTML Editor
> Datum: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 21:14:43 +1000
> Von: Nick Edwards <ni...@gmail.com>
> An: Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net>
>
> you hate how im talking to you? good! now you know what it felt like
> by all those newbies you belittle and bully, maybe you will think
> twice about bullying them and coming over as a fucking dictator again
> huh but probably not, nutters like you never learn.
>
> so you fuck off and dont write me again, and I wont have any need to
> abuse you back.
>
> starting now, so if you want no contact you better fucking not reply
>
>> On 10/1/14, Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net> wrote:
>>> Am 30.09.2014 um 18:12 schrieb jdebert:
>>>> On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 19:19:10 +0200
>>>> Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 29.09.2014 um 19:14 schrieb Nels Lindquist:
>>>>>> On 9/29/2014 10:54 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> please remove markers like [SPAM] if a mesage was flagged before
>>>>>>> reply - they lead often that a message goes to junk- instead the
>>>>>>> list-folder :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please teach your users to filter on the List-ID: header rather than
>>>>>> Subject: for this list. The issue can be entirely avoided without
>>>>>> requiring everyone else in the world to alter their behaviour
>>>>>
>>>>> the [SPAM] marker comes *before* all other sieve-filters
>>>>> otherwise it would not catch faked From-Headers
>>>>>
>>>>> it's not a big deal but i see that mistake sometimes
>>>>> also in business communication - not real good
>>>>
>>>> I do not see any subject lines in this thread with [SPAM] in them. I
>>>> rarely see them in this list at all. (I suspect people are aware it can
>>>> cause some poorer filtering implementations to delete them.)
>>>
>>> so what - this was a new thread to not hijack others
>>>
>>>> Perhaps you need to look closer to home for this problem?
>>>
>>> for sure not if it appears in the middle of subjects
>>>
>>>> Meantime, it is highly recommended that, if someone subscribes to a
>>>> list about spam, one MUST make an exception to their filtering rules as
>>>> previously mentioned. It's also very sensible. It is ridiculous to
>>>> insist that people talking about spam stop using the word "spam"
>>>
>>> the SA list has a -100 score
>>>
>>> that won't change the fact that it is in general a bad
>>> attitude not look at the subject of a mail someone
>>> writes, but so be it until another flamewar starts
>>> because some smart asses need to reply to a hint
>>> wich needs no repsonse at all and was intended to
>>> just point out a common mistake
>
>
Re: half-OT: please remove spam-markers from subjects
Posted by Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net>.
Am 03.10.2014 um 12:56 schrieb Nick Edwards:
> jdebert, (since im not reply to the bully troll)
>
> he doesnt learn, worried about flame wars but kicks off by calling
> other people smart asses, just ignore him, most of the rest of the
> internet has done for a while
creep away damned stalker - nobody asked you and the only smart
ass here is you - what was that with "don't write me again and
I wont have any need to abuse you back" below and how did you
treat roundcube developers and continue to abuse against me days
later each time you are bored and seek posts from me?
Nick Edwards | 26 Sep 18:01 2014
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.mail.roundcube.user/4500
-------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
Betreff: Re: [RCU] Time for new HTML Editor
Datum: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 21:14:43 +1000
Von: Nick Edwards <ni...@gmail.com>
An: Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net>
you hate how im talking to you? good! now you know what it felt like
by all those newbies you belittle and bully, maybe you will think
twice about bullying them and coming over as a fucking dictator again
huh but probably not, nutters like you never learn.
so you fuck off and dont write me again, and I wont have any need to
abuse you back.
starting now, so if you want no contact you better fucking not reply
> On 10/1/14, Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net> wrote:
>> Am 30.09.2014 um 18:12 schrieb jdebert:
>>> On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 19:19:10 +0200
>>> Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Am 29.09.2014 um 19:14 schrieb Nels Lindquist:
>>>>> On 9/29/2014 10:54 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> please remove markers like [SPAM] if a mesage was flagged before
>>>>>> reply - they lead often that a message goes to junk- instead the
>>>>>> list-folder :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Please teach your users to filter on the List-ID: header rather than
>>>>> Subject: for this list. The issue can be entirely avoided without
>>>>> requiring everyone else in the world to alter their behaviour
>>>>
>>>> the [SPAM] marker comes *before* all other sieve-filters
>>>> otherwise it would not catch faked From-Headers
>>>>
>>>> it's not a big deal but i see that mistake sometimes
>>>> also in business communication - not real good
>>>
>>> I do not see any subject lines in this thread with [SPAM] in them. I
>>> rarely see them in this list at all. (I suspect people are aware it can
>>> cause some poorer filtering implementations to delete them.)
>>
>> so what - this was a new thread to not hijack others
>>
>>> Perhaps you need to look closer to home for this problem?
>>
>> for sure not if it appears in the middle of subjects
>>
>>> Meantime, it is highly recommended that, if someone subscribes to a
>>> list about spam, one MUST make an exception to their filtering rules as
>>> previously mentioned. It's also very sensible. It is ridiculous to
>>> insist that people talking about spam stop using the word "spam"
>>
>> the SA list has a -100 score
>>
>> that won't change the fact that it is in general a bad
>> attitude not look at the subject of a mail someone
>> writes, but so be it until another flamewar starts
>> because some smart asses need to reply to a hint
>> wich needs no repsonse at all and was intended to
>> just point out a common mistake
Re: half-OT: please remove spam-markers from subjects
Posted by Nick Edwards <ni...@gmail.com>.
jdebert, (since im not reply to the bully troll)
he doesnt learn, worried about flame wars but kicks off by calling
other people smart asses, just ignore him, most of the rest of the
internet has done for a while
On 10/1/14, Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net> wrote:
>
> Am 30.09.2014 um 18:12 schrieb jdebert:
>> On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 19:19:10 +0200
>> Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 29.09.2014 um 19:14 schrieb Nels Lindquist:
>>>> On 9/29/2014 10:54 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> please remove markers like [SPAM] if a mesage was flagged before
>>>>> reply - they lead often that a message goes to junk- instead the
>>>>> list-folder :-)
>>>>
>>>> Please teach your users to filter on the List-ID: header rather than
>>>> Subject: for this list. The issue can be entirely avoided without
>>>> requiring everyone else in the world to alter their behaviour
>>>
>>> the [SPAM] marker comes *before* all other sieve-filters
>>> otherwise it would not catch faked From-Headers
>>>
>>> it's not a big deal but i see that mistake sometimes
>>> also in business communication - not real good
>>
>> I do not see any subject lines in this thread with [SPAM] in them. I
>> rarely see them in this list at all. (I suspect people are aware it can
>> cause some poorer filtering implementations to delete them.)
>
> so what - this was a new thread to not hijack others
>
>> Perhaps you need to look closer to home for this problem?
>
> for sure not if it appears in the middle of subjects
>
>> Meantime, it is highly recommended that, if someone subscribes to a
>> list about spam, one MUST make an exception to their filtering rules as
>> previously mentioned. It's also very sensible. It is ridiculous to
>> insist that people talking about spam stop using the word "spam"
>
> the SA list has a -100 score
>
> that won't change the fact that it is in general a bad
> attitude not look at the subject of a mail someone
> writes, but so be it until another flamewar starts
> because some smart asses need to reply to a hint
> wich needs no repsonse at all and was intended to
> just point out a common mistake
>
>