[Mimedefang] X-Auto-Response-Suppress header
bernd at petrovitsch.priv.at
Tue May 22 06:10:38 EDT 2012
On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 12:22 -0700, kd6lvw at yahoo.com wrote:
> --- On Mon, 5/21/12, Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd at petrovitsch.priv.at> wrote:
> > On Don, 2012-05-17 at 16:02 -0700, kd6lvw at yahoo.com wrote:
> > > ...
> > > Beliefs like yours are the problem. Policies like mine cause the
> > > solution.
> > Perhaps it is more annoying if you add these rules to SpamAssassin and
> > score spam points for it.
> Definently not. A rejected message (returned to the sender) gets more
> action (or administrative notice) than one accepted as spam therefore
Maybe, but in commercial environments it depends if the sender needs
more from the receiver (or has more force/power/....) or vice versa to
decide which of both opinions on the issues decide the following
And that can well be "turn off the blocking".
Please note that I didn't mention anything on what is correct and what
is wrong, good or bad or ugly, standard-compliant or not, etc. because
that does not matter in any way there - it is a religious matter for
these people in believing in M$FT.
No, I do not like it either but the majority of people obviously have no
problem with it.
Yes, I reply inline and delete full-quotes (if I happen to answer them).
Yes, I mark all of these "I'm, not in my office until" mails as spam
(especially if I get more than one inclusive-or they go over a mailing
list) because that *is* spam as in "unsolicited bulk email".
Just plain rejecting mails simply kills the communication (as it kills
the business relation) so that won't you get that far.
Any better idea than being a PITA and flagging it as spam to get in the
long run people to think about it?
Bernd Petrovitsch Email : bernd at petrovitsch.priv.at
LUGA : http://www.luga.at
More information about the MIMEDefang