VANAGON archives -- September 2010, week 2 (#250)

Date:         Mon, 13 Sep 2010 17:28:55 -0500
Reply-To:     Jarrett Anthony Kupcinski <kupcinski@GMAIL.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Jarrett Anthony Kupcinski <kupcinski@GMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: bounce related to vanagon list post:   Fwd: Your email
              requires verification verify#S8kdm1YcyRtVOIQT5uWJNjsC2FyaBska)
In-Reply-To:  <22099034-188D-4E97-8BBB-7CDF57717380@eoni.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

While I agree with you and hate whitelisting as much as I hate call waiting, the person who uses a whitelist may not be aware of the inconvenience it represents. My brother, who is a proficient computer user, had one on his email because it was part of a "package" of anti spam settings offered by his ISP. When I told him I was getting the whitelist requests, his reply was "that's just stupid," and adjusted his filtering settings. Most list members are probably tech savvy enough to know the difference, but you never know.

Just my .02, free to you. :)

-Jarrett Kupcinski
 
On Sep 13, 2010, at 4:25 PM, Jim Arnott wrote:

> <listmember hat on>
> 
> The below is generated by a listmember using a whitelisting service.
> It requires that mail received from any new address respond to a
> computer generated message before it will allow delivery of the
> original message. Personally, I feel that such services are rather
> presumptuous on the subscriber's part.  My immediate reaction to such
> notices is, "You signed up here. You want information from us. Why
> should I have to jump through ANY hoops to share my thought with you.
> You want me to send email to you. You make it happen.  It's not my
> responsibility." Then I delete the whitelist request. If I get another
> one, I simply create a rule to trash further mail coming from that
> address.
> 
> But that's just me.
> 
> Jim
> 
> On Sep 11, 2010, at 12:17 PM, a Vanagon List subscriber wrote:
> 
>> got this message back after sending a post to the list.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> Received: by 10.216.139.161 with SMTP id c33cs79682wej;
>>>       Sat, 11 Sep 2010 10:57:29 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Received: by 10.150.219.18 with SMTP id r18mr16936ybg.
>>> 172.1284227848397;
>>>       Sat, 11 Sep 2010 10:57:28 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Return-Path: <ventas@ingmedia-cr.net>
>>> Received: from server1.inmedia-cr.net ([174.36.1.34])
>>>       by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q31si8595441ybk.
>>> 50.2010.09.11.10.57.28;
>>>       Sat, 11 Sep 2010 10:57:28 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.36.1.34 is neither permitted
>>> nor denied by best guess record for domain of ventas@ingmedia-
>>> cr.net) client-ip=174.36.1.34;
>>> Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
>>> 174.36.1.34 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
>>> for domain of ventas@ingmedia-cr.net) smtp.mail=ventas@ingmedia-cr.net
>>> Received: from ingmedia by server1.inmedia-cr.net with local (Exim
>>> 4.69)
>>>       (envelope-from <ventas@ingmedia-cr.net>)
>>>       id 1OuUKN-0005u3-RT
>>> 
>>> X-Boxtrapper: aKGXbY4I71S9dv2eqJ7Lb7YgZnB3porH
>>> X-Autorespond: aKGXbY4I71S9dv2eqJ7Lb7YgZnB3porH
>>> Precedence: auto_reply
>>> X-Precedence: auto_reply
>>> From: ventas@ingmedia-cr.net
>>> To: emaglott3@gmail.com
>>> Subject: Your email requires verification
>>> verify#S8kdm1YcyRtVOIQT5uWJNjsC2FyaBska)
>>> Message-Id: <E1OuUKN-0005u3-RT@server1.inmedia-cr.net>
>>> Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2010 12:57:27 -0500
>>> X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include
>>> it with any abuse report
>>> X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server1.inmedia-cr.net
>>> X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - gmail.com
>>> X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [559 555] / [47 12]
>>> X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - ingmedia-cr.net
>>> 
>>> The message you sent requires that you verify that you
>>> are a real live human being and not a spam source.
>>> 
>>> To complete this verification, simply reply to this message and leave
>>> the subject line intact.
>>> 
>>> The headers of the message sent from your address are shown below:
>>> 
>>> >From owner-vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM Sat Sep 11 12:57:27 2010
>>> Received: from gerry.vanagon.com ([71.126.148.6])
>>>       by server1.inmedia-cr.net with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
>>>       (envelope-from <owner-vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>)
>>>       id 1OuUKN-0005tt-O1
>>>       for ventas@INGMEDIA-CR.NET; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 12:57:27 -0500
>>> Received: from gerry (gerry.vanagon.com) by gerry.vanagon.com
>>> (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.004B1E55@gerry.vanagon.com
>>> >; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 13:56:55 -0400
>>> Received: from GERRY.VANAGON.COM by GERRY.VANAGON.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/
>>> IP release
>>>         1.8d) with spool id 8770828 for vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM;
>>> Sat, 11
>>>         Sep 2010 13:39:51 -0400
>>> Received: from mail-yw0-f54.google.com by gerry.vanagon.com (LSMTP
>>> for Windows
>>>         NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.004B1E4D@gerry.vanagon.com>;
>>> Sat, 11 Sep
>>>         2010 13:39:51 -0400
>>> Received: by ywt2 with SMTP id 2so2103939ywt.41 for
>>>         <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 10:39:49
>>> -0700 (PDT)
>>> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com;
>>> s=gamma;
>>> h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:x-mailer:date:to
>>>               :from:subject:mime-version:content-type;
>>>               bh=2lQdRIGlyagJ16MuoDszrwHiHsUMJW3sOMXvJ0cFric=;
>>> b=uPo69AbRYj3TXoYXSNrcX7n/dGnAS+8LjY3rSyy2n4qmOcxJvafFwqykfm/gquj4pd

>>> 4ZPRepURxi0GyZG5j+pg0HvQcOs14bEjGQ2vzIPDXh2aYpGwcuZaoC5de4JC69fnjOVj
>>>               DtGnJdaAXiMtWRKK+FqprXpU2+N1hak1se6yI=
>>> DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
>>> h=message-id:x-mailer:date:to:from:subject:mime-version:content-type;
>>> b=HB9ohKwGDkZnR/TFycs4v/Wfk6j1OENyb8nnhfB68axW79cj3HLexC9zmjemWawrjl

>>> PinXFy/Wg9C0FnmPlUFAnrTtaRrWOjA3tKTL7kbCrz9TLVV4izOGhEnuBnWrjyZRLe4B
>>>                    K7mE87IiBSniMMK/pjheaJeA16v6YhwItvw4Y=
>>> Received: by 10.100.29.28 with SMTP id c28mr2246025anc.
>>> 227.1284226789550; Sat,
>>>         11 Sep 2010 10:39:49 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Received: from pczx13900.gmail.com
>>> (adsl-243-181-159.ard.bellsouth.net
>>>         [74.243.181.159]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id
>>>         w6sm6258149anb.3.2010.09.11.10.39.47 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3
>>>         cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 11 Sep 2010 10:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
>>> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
>>> Mime-Version: 1.0
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>>> Message-ID:  <4c8bbee4.0663640a.2fc7.ffffc9c9@mx.google.com>
>>> Date:         Sat, 11 Sep 2010 13:39:47 -0400
>>> Reply-To:     <deleted>
>>> Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
>>> From:         <deleted>
>>> Subject:      semi-urgent auto transmission question
>>> To:           vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>> 
>>

Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main VANAGON page

Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!

Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com

The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.

Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.