From roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com Sun Jan 29 09:42:19 2006
Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34])
	by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k0TGgJtK028043;
	Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:42:19 -0700
Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l.rootsweb.com [66.43.16.22])
	by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k0TGfqOn018658
	for <roots-approved@rootsweb.com>; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:41:52 -0700
Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l [127.0.0.1])
	by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k0TEDxFI018144
	for <roots-approved@rootsweb.com>; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:13:59 -0500
Received: (from roots-in@localhost)
	by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.8/Submit) id k0TEDxde018143
	for roots-approved@rootsweb.com; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:13:59 -0500
Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [66.43.27.41])
	by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k0T3NSFI002132
	for <roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com>; Sat, 28 Jan 2006 22:23:28 -0500
Received: (from slist@localhost)
	by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) id k0T5p9QR016077
	for roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com; Sat, 28 Jan 2006 22:51:09 -0700
X-Envelope-From: djwdjw@ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 28 22:51:09 2006
Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34])
	by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k0T5p9tK016068
	for <ROOTS-L@lists5.rootsweb.com>; Sat, 28 Jan 2006 22:51:09 -0700
Received: from pop05.mail.atl.earthlink.net (pop05.mail.atl.earthlink.net [207.69.200.58])
	by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k0T5p8pq019291
	for <ROOTS-L@rootsweb.com>; Sat, 28 Jan 2006 22:51:09 -0700
Received: from dialup-4.158.129.118.dial1.chicago1.level3.net ([4.158.129.118] helo=S0029330476)
	by pop05.mail.atl.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #10)
	id 1F35Su-0005cN-00; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:51:08 -0500
Message-ID: <003201c62497$fc980280$20819e04@S0029330476>
From: "djweber" <djwdjw@ix.netcom.com>
To: <ROOTS-L@rootsweb.com>
Cc: <mscheffl@twcny.rr.com>
References: <200601281500.k0SF0SKX009124@lists5.rootsweb.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 23:50:19 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="Windows-1252";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34
Sender: roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com
Subject: [ROOTS-L] Re:  Margaret Scheffler's thoughts on blocking messages

A genealogist who blocks mail is not a genealogist!!!  Rarely is a 
genealogical question answered by return mail.  Often the questioning 
message is found in an archival search and a answer is sent weeks, months, 
years later.  I have received messages up to ten years after the original 
on-line question.

I completely agree with Margaret Scheffler's annoyance when the attempt to 
contact an individual to offer potential information is stopped, or 
temporarily stopped, by a personal anti-Spam program in effect.  Most ISPs 
today offer Spam Blocking as part of their service and the degree of that 
blocking may be established by the individual.  A response to Margaret has 
incorrectly identified EarthLink's Spam Blocking methods in an attempt to 
justify an unnecessary second, personal program.  My ISP is also part of 
EarthLink and set on Medium, the EarthLink Spam Blocker stops several 
hundred pieces of Spam each day allowing only a handful to trickle through 
while it allows all the genealogical information to arrive at my inbox.

If you are a genealogist you want to be able to receive any information 
which may aid you in your search.  You do not want to set any block in the 
way of an answer to your needs.

Agreed Spam is annoying.  In truth, it is more than annoying but proper use 
of the ISP service and a sound understanding of Spam with its type of 
subject lines, its made up sender names, its subject misspellings and, if 
available through your e-mail service, the ability to read mail through 
Properties  Spam can be eliminated from your computer, unopened, without any 
need of a secondary, private Spam service which suggests the denial of your 
interest in a genealogical return to your question.

djweber
djwdjw@ix.netcom.com


