On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:50 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote: > On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:05 AM, Rex Dieter <rdieter at math.unl.edu> wrote: > > On 01/25/2010 09:28 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote: > >> A number of people have been telling me for some time > >> (months if not years) that my email is being defined as spam. > >> [This is email that could not by any stretch of the imagination > >> be considered as spam, even by the thought-police.] > > > > That's not a simple question to answer. The complex part is that each > > ISP generally has it's own mechanisms and sets of rule on how/why to > > label spam. > > > > But I can tell you what's contained in the header of this message you > > just posted, > > > > X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 (2010-01-18) on > > bastion2.fedora.phx.redhat.com > > X-Spam-Level: IIIIIII (7%) > > X-Spam-Status: No > > > > So, this one in particular, isn't bad. > > Gmail things all his emails are bad. This one had the warning: > "Warning: This message may not be from whom it claims to be." Not here it doesn't. I get the list via Gmail, including Timothy's posts, and none of it is marked as suspicious. poc
