On Friday 16 August 2002 08:24 pm, Peter wrote:
> my exmh-2.5 suddenly will not spell-check anymore. If I click
> More..., Spell... a window opens and is gone just as fast.
> I don't recall having tinkered with anything.
It may be a conspiracy against spell checkers. I noticed the Spell icon
was dimmed in Netscape Communicator 4.79 about a month ago. It worked
The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its
capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system.

> Why would spam be likely to end up with two instances of Return-Path
Possibly another qmail-ism from Bruce Guenter's spam collection.  Or
maybe Anthony's right about spammers being stupid and blindly copying
headers.  (Well, of course he's right about spammers being stupid; it's
just this particular aspect of stupidity that's open to question.)

from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF7494416E
	for <jm@localhost>; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 10:26:08 -0400 (EDT)
from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 26 Aug 2002 15:26:08 +0100 (IST)
from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
    with ESMTP id D60FB2940FF; Sat, 24 Aug 2002 07:59:08 -0700 (PDT)
from hotmail.com (f199.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.199]) by
    xent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 447D92940FF for <fork@xent.com>;
    Sat, 24 Aug 2002 07:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
    Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:00:15 -0700
from 216.30.74.2 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
    Sat, 24 Aug 2002 15:00:15 GMT
From fork-admin@xent.com  Mon Aug 26 15:32:00 2002

Lucas Gonze:
>Senders should vary the recipient list to include non-targets, like party
>officials, and to exclude targets enough to give them plausible
>deniability.
Which means the sender has a list of who the true
targets are, and who the fake targets are, and
scripts for mixing these. On the receiving side,
my email client distinguishes between messages
that are read, and messages that are not. I like
to mark or save messages that are particularly
interresting or important to me. And even if I
make a point to delete "suspicious material"
immediately upon reading it, even THAT might
leave an interesting kind of trace on my machine.
Sorry, but I don't buy the argument that spam
protects people who want to distribute or see
material the government disapproves.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork