From: Jason Dagit Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: djgpp 2.1? Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 21:27:33 -0800 Organization: Dagit Enterprises Lines: 29 Message-ID: <34F25A45.CB74B4@mail.coos.or.us> References: Reply-To: thedagit AT mail DOT coos DOT or DOT us NNTP-Posting-Host: coosbay1-68.transport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk Personally, I just reply to the group and I assume that the person has taken anit-spam measures. I mean, can you blame people? Spam and porn have become two of the biggest things on the internet. Kind of like roaches being on a population rise :) It's really sad too. Soon a person won't even be able to do a simple Internet search with out running into porn sites. But this isn't the news group for this subject. Eli Zaretskii wrote: > On 19 Feb 1998, DJ Delorie wrote: > > > If you are replying via the mailing list, and anti-spam addresses > > bother you, DON'T REPLY, or let the reply bounce (as long as you send > > to the mailing list too). > > I, for one thing, cannot afford to read carefully all the addresses just > to detect spam and not reply, or delete the fake address from the reply. > I read the body and sometimes the subject; I don't care about who (or > what) sent the message. Bouncing messages are a form of spam (and some > people even have to pay for it). > > I refuse to be spammed on behalf of somebody else's anti-spam. If I would > have cared that much for the spam (which takes a second to delete) I would > never post a single message. People who ask for help should at least > make the effort not to make it harder on me to help them. If they don't, > I will tell them that they are being rude.