For those of us that feel strongly that email should be a reliable transport medium.

James Sizemore james at DENY.ORG
Tue Feb 10 20:46:27 GMT 2004

Mark Warpool wrote:

>>every other
>>solution has serious down sides. Or causes  thousands of users to jump
>>hoops deleting mail they never wanted to begin with!
>No offense, but this sounds rather self-serving.  "I don't care who I
>damage, as long as my bottom line is safe."  I'm not a MailScanner
>expert here, but I'd be willing to bet that someone could come up with
>an alternate solution that would be a decent compromise.  But
>'reverse-spamming' everyone else so that you have no chance of upsetting
>your customers seems a little selfish.

The need of the many I think out way the need of the one or the few,
You want thousands of users to go through hundreds of emails a day they
did not want to save ten or fifteen poor slobs (And yes I have been one
of theses poor slobs before.) from get a few thousand email they did not
want.  The truth is BOTH of us are being selfish!!!  We both just happen
to be annoyed by  different side of the same problem. <grin>

All things aside I was not asking him to go against his best interest, I
was finding out if enough people felt like me to make a public patch
instead of just patching my own server and moving on, he was just trying
to offer me other options. Thats fine I just wished he had an option I
liked, but alas it was not so.

More information about the MailScanner mailing list