This from Mike Long (mikel@shore.net)
>>Date: Sat, 20 Dec 1997 18:31:59 -0500 (EST)
>>From: Mason Loring Bliss <mason@acheron.middleboro.ma.us>
>
>>UnObSpamRant: The most recent (lengthy) u.c.e. must have tipped the
>>bandwidth meter toward the spam itself, as opposed to discussion of it. I
>>guess pretending it's not there hasn't solved the problem.
>
>It's obvious that our current methods of spam-blocking are
>insufficient, but discussion of alternatives will have to wait until
>after everyone decompresses from the 1.3 release process.

This is assuming we have SPAM blocking, which is not a bad assumption.
Does our current method log the unwanted?  That is, how much SPAM are we
NOT seeing?

jf

--
John Franklin
franklin@blacksburg.net