X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Fri Aug 21 01:48:56 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <25890ca0908190732o7be5947ey2741cb6ba8dd742d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <25890ca0908190732o7be5947ey2741cb6ba8dd742d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 19:48:50 -0400
Message-ID: <c3b2b3db0908201648k4e82427ald40670e4373ff72@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andrei Dombay <wikibiophys@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: -0.3
X-Spam_score_int: -2
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software,
	running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or
	label similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview: I just came back from a few day trip and can respond.
	Do
	I have to justify a request for it and if so with how much detail? Yes, 
	you should. The details should be convincing enough if possible. Do not
	forget the "letter code" of violation. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.3 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.5 HTML_40_50             BODY: Message is 40% to 50% HTML
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	0.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb3 (2006-10-05) on 
	pakkun.mirky.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no 
	version=3.1.7-deb3
Subject: Re: [WPM] check user
X-BeenThere: folks@wikipedometer.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Id: Wikipedia statistics <folks.wikipedometer.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Help: <mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4792792516875107061=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -0.3
X-Spam_score_int: -2
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
	similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  I just came back from a few day trip and can respond. Do
	I have to justify a request for it and if so with how much detail? Yes,
	you should. The details should be convincing enough if possible. Do not
	forget the "letter code" of violation. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.3 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.5 HTML_40_50             BODY: Message is 40% to 50% HTML
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	0.1 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============4792792516875107061==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0003255589debcbe5504719b6433

--0003255589debcbe5504719b6433
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I just came back from a few day trip and can respond.




Do I have to justify a request for it and if so with how much detail?


Yes, you should. The details should be convincing enough if possible. Do not
forget the "letter code" of violation.


> Should I list whom I want the anon checked "against"?


Yes, absolutely.


> Is there a cost to including a name or two extra (to make sure)? Is there a
> potential downside - I'm sure someone will scream "hounding" or something,
> but is there a danger here?


Do not file CU case, unless you are really sure if at least one of them is a
sock. There is no cost if the first of listed suspects was justified well
enough. However, do not list anyone,
who you  think was most probably not him. Any obvious "fishing" will
decrease your credibility.

Andrei


>
>
> Radek
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia statistics discussion list
> folks@wikipedometer.net
> http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks
>
>

--0003255589debcbe5504719b6433
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I just came back from a few day trip and can respond.<br><br><br><br><div c=
lass=3D"gmail_quote"><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-=
left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left=
: 1ex;">
Do I have to justify a request for it and if so with how much detail? </blo=
ckquote><div><br>Yes, you should. The details should be convincing enough i=
f possible. Do not forget the &quot;letter code&quot; of violation.<br>
=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid =
rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Should I=
 list whom I want the anon checked &quot;against&quot;? </blockquote><div><=
br>
Yes, absolutely.<br>=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"bor=
der-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-=
left: 1ex;">Is there a cost to including a name or two extra (to make sure)=
? Is there a potential downside - I&#39;m sure someone will scream &quot;ho=
unding&quot; or something, but is there a danger here?</blockquote>
<div><br>Do not file CU case, unless you are really sure if at least one of=
 them is a sock. There is no cost if the first of listed suspects was justi=
fied well enough. However, do not list anyone,<br>who you=A0 think was most=
 probably not him. Any obvious &quot;fishing&quot; will decrease your credi=
bility.<br>
<br>Andrei <br>=A0<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"bord=
er-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-l=
eft: 1ex;"><br><font color=3D"#888888">
<br>Radek<br>
</font><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Wikipedia statistics discussion list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net">folks@wikipedometer.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks" target=
=3D"_blank">http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>

--0003255589debcbe5504719b6433--


--===============4792792516875107061==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia statistics discussion list
folks@wikipedometer.net
http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks

--===============4792792516875107061==--


