From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/6607
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Per Abrahamsen <abraham@dina.kvl.dk>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: Unsolicited ads
Date: 10 Jun 1996 15:53:43 +0200
Sender: abraham@dina.kvl.dk
Message-ID: <rjafybu5nc.fsf@kleene.dina.kvl.dk>
References: <amvigzg527.fsf@gcm.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035147038 4177 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:50:38 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:50:38 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no
Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id HAA15458 for <steve@miranova.com>; Mon, 10 Jun 1996 07:23:05 -0700
Original-Received: from elc1.dina.kvl.dk (elc1.dina.kvl.dk [130.225.40.228]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) 
	id <PAA18558@ifi.uio.no> for <ding@ifi.uio.no> ; Mon, 10 Jun 1996 15:54:31 +0200
Original-Received: from kleene.dina.kvl.dk (kleene.dina.kvl.dk [130.225.40.223]) by elc1.dina.kvl.dk (8.6.12/8.6.4) with ESMTP id PAA27939; Mon, 10 Jun 1996 15:53:28 +0200
Original-Received: (abraham@localhost) by kleene.dina.kvl.dk (8.6.12/8.6.4) id PAA25473; Mon, 10 Jun 1996 15:53:45 +0200
Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no
X-Face: +kRV2]2q}lixHkE{U)mY#+6]{AH=yN~S9@IFiOa@X6?GM<U{B+4e{k79.Ya{~':DblFPCg$
 @60,BfLv2@SKZ19cMWK0/C'v;tM:|6B'R}U1rp6CL&kN({9<zF/V{:JCg27yC)9oZjeqcQawzKfiNL
 t9}`vjmK["dRQC/qGFQq"%u|Q`:6{"Rz}b(dnl_"3$Jtqimi>|8MBp/
In-Reply-To: David Worenklein's message of 10 Jun 1996 09:30:08 -0400
Original-Lines: 11
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.2.5/Emacs 19.31
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:6607
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:6607

>>>>> "DW" == David Worenklein <dcw@gcm.com> writes:

DW> Has anyone thought
DW> about ways of dealing with this?  

Complain.  I usually forward a copy to `postmaster', `abuse', and the
technical and administrative contact (from whois) of the first host(s)
mentioned in the `received:' headers and the DNS server of that host.

It is a boring and time consuming job, but I think it is the only way
to keep the noise at a manageable level.