from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62115440CC
	for <jm@localhost>; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:57:58 -0400 (EDT)
from dogma.slashnull.org [212.17.35.15]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Wed, 24 Jul 2002 01:57:58 +0100 (IST)
from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
    with ESMTP id 9222B2940ED; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 17:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
from relay.pair.com (relay1.pair.com [209.68.1.20]) by xent.com
    (Postfix) with SMTP id E86B82940A8 for <fork@xent.com>; Tue,
    23 Jul 2002 17:48:19 -0700 (PDT)
From fork-admin@xent.com  Wed Jul 24 01:57:58 2002

"SpamAssassin Killed My Independence Day Party"
With all the spam that gets through, I had no idea
a filter was in effect at the FoRK listserv.
Turn it off! It not only risks silent false
positives, but suffers them in such a way that
Also, anti-spam startups need end-users.
Centralized spam fighting takes food out
I still think self-add whitelists are underrated.
A FoRK whitelist would presumably start with
all subscribers, and grow from there. Bouncing
problem mail, in a way that humans can understand
how to whitelist themselves for a resend, avoids
the problem of silent failures without opening the
Subject: Re: HD/ID: High-Def Independence Day
> On Sunday, June 30, 2002, at 12:18 AM, Rohit Khare wrote:
> > You're all invited to join me for a South Bay Hi-Def spectacle at my
> > apartment in Sunnyvale on the Fourth!
> So here's the final report on the HD/ID party. As no less than TEN
> forkers pointed out, the invitation, while sent on Sunday 6/30, was only
> Now, it was a little difficult to recalibrate self-esteem, which as you
> can imagine was proportional to the two-digit attendance  -- in binary!
> According to the George Washington documentary, I almost had as much
> alcohol on hand than he did -- Virginia tradition being to copiously
> lubricate each voter. Election day was a public festival day, and it
> cost poor George an average of SIXTY-FOUR shots of hard liquor PER VOTER
> So, herewith is the prize for most appropriate flame my delayed invite
> > I unfortunately will have had other plans and thus will
> > Wow - I just got this now - I guess that was KnowLate!
> And there is no prize for guessing which cold, dark forks emitted these
> > Fix your mail server! just a bit late!
> > God DAAAAAMMMMMNNNNN IIIIITTT! I didn't see your message until now!
> > We would have been there if I had seen the message before. Kuso! (as
> Perhaps I should remind the latter gently that it was not in any way his
> fault. The universe *was* out to get him!
> And finally, here's an object lesson for all ye of little faith to learn
> PS. This is the obscure footnote where I actually hide the bits in this
> post. What we just encountered here is that an event-processing system
> with a 10-day RTT cannot be used to reliably handle events more often
> than once every 20 days. That's why I waited to reply. six bonus points
> to anyone who can prove this hunch of mine. Hint: try analyzing the