Re: successful build - i686-pc-cygwin

[Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>]

On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 07:23:53PM -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
> So it may seem "fierce" for me to say we should think about a ban,
> but I'm a bit worried about just ignoring the issue.  I suppose we
> could rig up a procmail filter to bounce messages with certain
> phrases, like "confidential", but we'll probably get false hits.

Rather than dropping the suspect messages, the filter could forward them
to someone for approval.  The false hits would then get passed on (with
a slight delay).  I too am worried by these emails.

There's also an axiom (I forget its formal name) stating that when the
lawyer-mandated disclaimer at the bottom is longer than the message body
itself, the email contains zero useful information and can be ignored. :-)

Phil

-- 
Would I had phrases that are not known, utterances that are strange, in
new language that has not been used, free from repetition, not an utterance
which has grown stale, which men of old have spoken.
                                     - anonymous Egyptian scribe, c.1700 BC