from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 533A243FB1
	for <jm@localhost>; Fri,  9 Aug 2002 09:43:23 -0400 (EDT)
from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Fri, 09 Aug 2002 14:43:23 +0100 (IST)
from webnote.net (mail.webnote.net [193.120.211.219]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g79DiGb02527 for
    <jm-razor@jmason.org>; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 14:44:16 +0100
from usw-sf-list2.sourceforge.net (usw-sf-fw2.sourceforge.net
    [216.136.171.252]) by webnote.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA06657 for
    <jm-razor@jmason.org>; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 14:41:06 +0100
from usw-sf-list1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.13]
    helo=usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net) by usw-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with
    esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17d9vz-0001Ti-00; Fri,
    09 Aug 2002 06:36:07 -0700
from med-core07.med.wayne.edu ([146.9.19.23]) by
    usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id
    17d9vm-0003UR-00 for <razor-users@lists.sourceforge.net>; Fri,
    09 Aug 2002 06:35:54 -0700
from quoted-printable to 8bit by dogma.slashnull.org
    id g79DiGb02527
From razor-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net  Fri Aug  9 14:43:23 2002

> Who loses in this case? Why? Neither party is inaccurate in their
> actions IMO. But someone's standing is going to get hurt because of
My question for the trust system is this. I signed up for a free account
on some website that gives me free access to a large compilation of
and in so doing have subscribed myself to their mailing list. The
includes a list of new articles and books and so forth as well as a few
This is consistently flagged as spam, even though I *agreed* to see it,
and I *want* to see what new articles there are, since some of them
be interesting. Thus, since it is certifiably *not* spam (it even
includes a link to terminate your account), I revoke it. Even so, the
Who is losing a trust rating here? If it is not unsolicited commercial
e- mail, it should not be reported by Razor as spam -- correct?