On Fri, Dec 28, 2007 at 08:45:13PM -0000, De Zeurkous wrote:
> Haai,
> 
> On Fri, December 28, 2007 19:54, Martijn van Buul wrote:
> > * De Zeurkous:
> >> Haai,
> >>
> >> My last message, addressed to jmcneill@invisible.ca (and fortunately
> >> properly CC'ed to tech-pkg), evoked the following response:
> >
> > No, CC'ed to tech-kernel, I have no clue why you decided to bother
> > tech-pkg..
> 
> I don't either. My bad :^) -- the usual excuses apply...
> 
> >
> >>   (reason: 550 5.7.1 Sorry, we do not accept SPAM at invisible.ca.)
> >>
> >> While I may be a flamer and an IRC bot overengineer, I'm not exactly a
> >> spammer. Please fix.
> >
> > You also complain to the wrong people. You need to talk to the fine people
> > at invisible.ca. They're the wrong blocking your message.
> 
> No. jmcneill should. If it's his server -- can't be bothered to check it
> right now, I /still/ have a lack of decent sleep on my hands -- he should
> fix it himself; if he uses a third party mail service, he should.

The Cc:  line has not been trimmed.  Please feel free to complain
about it on the Linux kernel mailing list.

For everyone's information, I asked Jared for the rule which he used
to block your email, and he told me that he used the following rule:

	/^From:.*@nichten.info/ REJECT Sorry, we do not accept SPAM at invisible.ca.

in the postfix header checks.

I know of many other people who prefer to block spam at the MUA level
using procmail so:

	::
	FROM.*zeurkous@nichten.info
	spam

in .procmailrc.

Regards,
Alistair

PS. For anyone following up, I'd be grateful if you could include this email
in its entirety, please. Thanks in advance.