<html><head></head><body>In the case of the SMX solution the error message returned is very descriptive of the reason the message was rejected (without identifying the trigger of course). This is how I detected the problem in the first place - mailman advising me of the bounces it had received.<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 14 January 2016 11:32:54 AM NZDT, Stephen Rothwell <lca@rothwell.id.au> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail">Hi,<br /><br />On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 07:57:31 +1000 Adam Nielsen <a.nielsen@shikadi.net> wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;"><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"> Their spam engines are commercial in nature and whilst pretty<br /> accurate, do false-positive occasionally. It suggests that something<br /> about the email content/payload matches an email previously reported<br /> as spam to one of the engines concerned. <br /></blockquote> <br /> I run my own Spamassassin install and I've also had to whitelist<br /> linux-aus otherwise many messages end up classified as spam. This<br /> isn't unique to linux-aus though, it affects many mailing lists.<br /></blockquote><br />It would be nice if these commercial spam engines told the<br />(non)receivers of email that they dropped as
much information as<br />spamassassin does ... assuming that the receiver wants that information.<br /></pre></blockquote></div><br>
-- <br>
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.</body></html>