<html> <body> Hi, Rob, At 09:06 PM 4/4/2007, you wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite=""> It has just come to my attention that when I send e-mails to the list it is attaching a lot of extra crap- apparently needless network information.  Has anyone else found this when they open my mail?  I sent a test mail to myself and it wasn't there.  I found no unusual settings in the "options" or "tools" settings.   Rob Goodale, RPT Las Vegas, NV</blockquote> OK...pulling the headers out where they can be seen gives this information: ++++++++++++++++++ X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.3 Delivered-To: hgreeley@stanford.edu From: "Rob & Helen Goodale" <rrg@unlv.nevada.edu> To: "Pianotech List" <pianotech@ptg.org> Subject: Extra crap attached to e-mails --  OT Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 21:06:43 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-Spam-Status: No X-Spam-Score: -1.716, threshold=4.5, rules_hit=AWL, BAYES_00, <x-tab>        </x-tab> DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS, HTML_50_60, HTML_MESSAGE, SPF_FAIL X-Spam-Level: [] X-Spam-Report: NSHE SCS, griffith-peak.scsv.nevada.edu, Wed, <x-tab>        </x-tab>04 Apr 2007 21:06:50 -0700 <x-tab>        </x-tab> SpamAssassin 3.0.4, 2005-06-05 [spam threshold=4.5 pts] <x-tab>        </x-tab>-1.7 total points [autolearn=no], summary follows: <x-tab>        </x-tab>pts rule name              description <x-tab>        </x-tab>---- ---------------------- <x-tab>        </x-tab> -------------------------------------------------- <x-tab>        </x-tab>0.9 SPF_FAIL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (fail) <x-tab>        </x-tab>[SPF failed: Please see <x-tab>        </x-tab> <a href="http://spf.pobox.com/why.html?sender=rrg%40unlv.nevada.edu&ip=131.216.128.62&receiver=griffith-peak.scsv.nevada.edu" eudora="autourl"> http://spf.pobox.com/why.html?sender=rrg%40unlv.nevada.edu&ip=131.216.128.62&receiver=griffith-peak.scsv.nevada.edu</a> ] <x-tab>        </x-tab>0.1 HTML_50_60             BODY: Message is 50% to 60% HTML <x-tab>        </x-tab>-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% <x-tab>        </x-tab>[score: 0.0000] <x-tab>        </x-tab>0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message <x-tab>        </x-tab>0.3 DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS RBL: Envelope sender in whois.rfc-ignorant.org <x-tab>        </x-tab>-0.4 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.51 on 131.216.1.15 X-BeenThere: pianotech@ptg.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.7 Reply-To: Pianotech List <pianotech@ptg.org> Sender: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org It has just come to my attention that when I send e-mails to the list it is attaching a lot of extra crap- apparently needless network information.  Has anyone else found this when they open my mail?  I sent a test mail to myself and it wasn't there.  I found no unusual settings in the "options" or "tools" settings.   Rob Goodale, RPT Las Vegas, NV +++++++++++++++++++++++++ No, I have not found this to be the case with your posts. It may be that you have some HTML stuff buried someplace (which some EM readers do not like very much), or that MS Outlook is just misbehaving.  Most of the above looks to me like the normal kind of stuff that gets added when messages are pushed out between various mail servers.  In your case, someone at UNLV has added a Spam Assassin scan to outgoing mail...though why they would burn the CPU cycles to scan outbound mail eludes me (unless they are trying to avoid being "black-listed" by someone like AOL or Earthlink, or, more likely, protect the University from its own students). If folks are seeing junk as part of EM messages that you are sending out (which I have not seen, yet), they might also be running some older or non-main-stream EM reader.  (We still have some folks at Stanford who insist on using "Pine" for EM...and then whine about it barfing on just about everything...go figure.)  I occasionally get forwards/messages from some folks who are running older versions of things like Apple Mail or Microsoft Mail which sometimes have to be opened as a text file to legible.  Sometimes, if it is too egregious to deal with, I simply send back what I get from them. Part of the problem with the design of the communications protocols used on the 'Net is that, in trying to be all things to all people, there is very little that they actually do very well...just a whole bunch of stuff in a rather ho-hum, hap-hazard kind of way...which mostly works.  The point is, one cannot possibly please all of the people all of the time...it's one of those Aural v. ETD kinds of problems...e.g., one with no one "right" answer. Hope this is of some help. Best. Horace </body> </html>