[SURBL-Discuss] Re: Revisiting high-level 3.1 goals

Daniel Quinlan quinlan at pathname.com
Mon Jan 31 05:03:37 CET 2005

Oh crap.  It's *me* that's confused and I'm sure I'll get 5 replies from
people who don't read all their mail before sending replies telling me
that.  Anyway, disregard my last message.

Adding JP to WS was clearly a horrible idea to begin with.  However,
wasting a bit on this is silly (and I think that's what I'm reacting to
here), especially considering that Henry and I have been discussing a
revamp of the SURBL rules where source would not matter and the number
of bits set would matter -- we'd have to special case this.


Daniel Quinlan

More information about the Discuss mailing list