On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:50 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:05 AM, Rex Dieter
> On 01/25/2010 09:28 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>> A number of people have been telling me for some time
>> (months if not years) that my email is being defined as spam.
>> [This is email that could not by any stretch of the imagination
>> be considered as spam, even by the thought-police.]
> That's not a simple question to answer. The complex part is that each
> ISP generally has it's own mechanisms and sets of rule on how/why to
> label spam.
> But I can tell you what's contained in the header of this message you
> just posted,
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 (2010-01-18) on
> X-Spam-Level: IIIIIII (7%)
> X-Spam-Status: No
> So, this one in particular, isn't bad.
Gmail things all his emails are bad. This one had the warning:
"Warning: This message may not be from whom it claims to be."
Not here it doesn't. I get the list via Gmail, including Timothy's
posts, and none of it is marked as suspicious.