paddy at panici.net
Fri May 23 16:54:03 BST 2008
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 04:02:18PM +0100, Martin A. Brooks wrote:
> Matt Jones wrote:
>>> I wouldn't classify that as spam, as it's not really been sent in bulk
>>> without regard for who the recipient is.
>> I duuno about that. Unsolicited? Check. Commercial? Check. Email?
>> Check. Ergo: spam.
> That acid test for spam or unsolicited mail is whether the sender is
> trying to disguise their identity and the origin of the email or not..
huh? Which part of unsolicited are you having a problem with ?
More information about the london.pm