[ntp:questions] Allan deviation survey
joegwinn at comcast.net
Tue Sep 14 03:58:17 UTC 2010
In article <slrni8sddh.n3i.unruh at wormhole.physics.ubc.ca>,
unruh <unruh at wormhole.physics.ubc.ca> wrote:
> On 2010-09-13, Joseph Gwinn <joegwinn at comcast.net> wrote:
> > Unruh,
> > In article <slrni8ru62.i6p.unruh at wormhole.physics.ubc.ca>,
> > unruh <unruh at wormhole.physics.ubc.ca> wrote:
> >> On 2010-09-13, David L. Mills <mills at udel.edu> wrote:
> > [snip]
> >> > ... And, by the way, mail sent to your alleged mail address is
> >> > returned to sender as undeliverable.
> >> Yes, I am sorry about that but it is done in order to slightly reduce
> >> the spam I get. It should be clear how to alter it, but I realise that
> >> that makes more work for the responder. For a long time I did not munge
> >> my address, and as a result am on a number of spam lists.
> > The address did not look munged to me either. It makes perfect sense for a
> > physicist to name servers after physics objects.
> Ah, I finally looked at it. I used to use the nn new reader which munged
> my email address. I recently (well a year ago) switched to slrn, and
> just assumed that the same would occur there. Your comments caused me to
> actually read one of my posts as it appeared on the newsgoup, and sure
> enough it is the address of the machine running slrn ( which does not receive
> mail) instead of the munged address. Sorry about the wrong explanation. If you
> really want to email me you can remove the wormhole. But answering on
> the list is probably better anyway.
Ah. I wasn't today trying to email anyone, but I could see the problem should I
try. Anyway, now that it's understood, it can be fixed.
More information about the questions