> -----Original Message----- > From: PSE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:PSE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Many sites employ SpamAssassin and the like to simply FLAG > messages and pass them along to the intended recipient, who can then > employ their own filter process within their email client This is what I do. Spam is tagged by a statistical filter, then tagged messages are filtered into a "Junk Mail" folder by the user's email client. In a corporate environment, where silently dropping mail from a customer is totally unacceptable, this is a good compromise. The user can skim their junk mail folder now and then and pick out anything that looks like it's important. (I do this about once a day; only takes a few seconds. A non-spam message in a folder full of spam tends to be surprisingly obvious.) > Of course, what do I know? Up till now, I assumed > intelligent folk could > manage to send a reply to a listserv without also sending an > unnecessary > carbon to the original message poster, and if not, at least courteous > people would pay attention to the sigline making such a request... If I did this earlier, I'm sorry. I correspond with a lot of people who prefer to get carbon copies of list replies, especially on moderated lists. I'm also not in the habit of reading signatures because they tend to be a waste of time. After seeing several dozen with bogus disclaimers and the like in them you lose interest... > John Fitzgibbon wrote: > >Archiving the dropped mail *and* terminating with a 5xx would be a much > >better approach. To me that seems *totally* broken. A 5xx response means you didn't deliver the mail, and the failure was permanent. Terminating with a 5xx and then delivering the mail somewhere isn't kosher; in fact, it's the worst of both worlds. You've still accepted the spam, *and* you've potentially created a DSN.
