John Corliss said:
I would say that it rates a "1" on that scale, since I'm only posting
it to this group.
I've thought for a long while that you have no idea how spam is
measured; you seem to be confirming that. Why will you not read (or not
understand) the various resources to which you have been referred?
Also, F.A.Q. notices seem to be immune from spam criticisms as long as
they are legit.
Indeed - though "being legit" means "not having a high BI". You have
already been told this, though.
This isn't to say that somebody like Mabbett might try to make a big
deal of it.
Reds under the bed! Film at eleven!
Your obsession is showing, again.
On the other hand, he's complained so much to my ISP that they blocked
his domain range out of frustration with him.
A lie.
You yourself have admitted to being warned by your ISP, after I
complained to them; not least about you forging my ID to subscribe me to
mailing lists.
What, by the way, is a "domain range"?
Thanks for the info, John. At this point though, since I use Mozilla it
will probably be identical subject headers.
Oh, get a clue.