[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       listar-support
Subject:    [ESupp] Re: followup, to do before 1.0
From:       Len Conrad <LConrad () Go2France ! com>
Date:       2003-03-07 14:25:53
[Download RAW message or body]

X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring
X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated
X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm)
X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm)
X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this
X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas
X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant
X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this
X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to <http://www.habeas.com.report/>.
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-archive-position: 6165
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0

Does Habeas really have to add 9 headers to every legit message?

Control-geek fascism and in-your-face, lawyer-wannabe obtrusiveness.  These 
Habeas freaks give BOFH a bad name, in the same way our shrub-in-chief 
gives plant intelligence a bad name.

imo, Habeas thereby becomes part of the problem rather than part of the 
solution.

It could be done in one line:

X-Len: Habeas into blackhole gleefully stuffed (tm) 2003

else,

header_checks.regexp:

/^x\-habeas/ 554 ACL Recipient warranted efficiency of email bandwidth

Len

--
Ecartis Support Mailing List <ecartis-support@ecartis.org>
To unsubscribe:
  <mailto:ecartis-support-request@ecartis.org?Subject=unsubscribe>

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]