From roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com Sun Jan 29 13:14:28 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 k0TKEStK008936; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:14:28 -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 k0TKEQ7W005019 for ; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:14:26 -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 k0THkWFI018685 for ; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:46:32 -0500 Received: (from roots-in@localhost) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.8/Submit) id k0THkWqb018684 for roots-approved@rootsweb.com; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:46:32 -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 k0THgpFI018616 for ; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:42:51 -0500 Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) id k0TKAaEq004068 for roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:10:36 -0700 X-Envelope-From: martinfamilytree@gmail.com Sun Jan 29 13:10:36 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 k0TKAatK004056 for ; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:10:36 -0700 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.192]) by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k0TKAXLx002258 for ; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:10:34 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 69so896218wra for ; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:10:34 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=fMy2mGq2YYfUH2LL33WGGFX6F6/+1be4/J2mvmJdEESl2sYDAZi7McgVIefUmxpdJRK3/isRzozRPGMmUdxysRAgDEFkoheDAcMuJKkHuxA54wh3oI5Nn2/Nz1RNaTs4XNINYSpl+ao0m4+nK+1WDNkiReTGcdZr6sPtKkiQ8vM= Received: by 10.65.206.14 with SMTP id i14mr1466986qbq; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:10:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.72.14 with HTTP; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:10:34 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:10:34 -0600 From: ctm 007 To: djweber Subject: Re: [ROOTS-L] Re: Margaret Scheffler's thoughts on blocking messages Cc: ROOTS-M@rootsweb.com In-Reply-To: <003201c62497$fc980280$20819e04@S0029330476> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: <200601281500.k0SF0SKX009124@lists5.rootsweb.com> <003201c62497$fc980280$20819e04@S0029330476> 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 Amen, I agree. I left an email message on Martin's message board at rootsweb.com in 1999 and my sister answered it in Sept 2005. My sister Beverly Martin was last seen on 4-2-1970 and then I lost all contact with her and my other sister and dad's wife (Beverly's mother). So, I agree; it is very important NOT to block email messages. Be very careful how you filter email messages; always allow yourself an opportunity to review the spam before you delete it. Yes, Beverly's reply was spam! Carl On 1/28/06, djweber wrote: > > 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 > > >