From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <2896.67.31.14.208.1064805819.squirrel@wish.cooper.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] spam rejection after reception does have limits
From: <salomo3@cooper.edu>
To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
In-Reply-To: <026e01c385aa$84c2cf80$b9844051@insultant.net>
References: <37477b39bbe70b4ef8ddcfdb150ea72e@caldo.demon.co.uk>
        <026e01c385aa$84c2cf80$b9844051@insultant.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 23:23:39 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 54b07b46-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

>> is quite a good brisk survey, with trenchant observations.
>
> 'tranchant' [cutting] now that's a good present participle.
>
> 'double tranchant' =3D=3D double edged sword

Yup, Like the scottish claymore. None of your wimpy M60s or whatever you
carry. These are weapons for *real* men - the scourge of spammers, etc..
:-)

joel