From robin.fairbairns@cl.cam.ac.uk  Thu Mar 22 13:23:33 2001
Received: from wisbech.cl.cam.ac.uk (exim@mta1.cl.cam.ac.uk [128.232.0.15])
	by dkuug.dk (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id NAA60027
	for <SC24@dkuug.dk>; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 13:23:33 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from robin.fairbairns@cl.cam.ac.uk)
Received: from pallas.cl.cam.ac.uk
	([128.232.8.88] helo=cl.cam.ac.uk ident=rf)
	by wisbech.cl.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.092 #1)
	id 14g47m-00006h-00; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 12:23:30 +0000
To: fujimura <fujimura@etl.go.jp>
cc: SC24@dkuug.dk
Subject: Re: (SC24.518) junk mails 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 22 Jun 2003 20:54:44 +0900."
             <200103221149.MAA59865@dkuug.dk> 
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 12:23:29 +0000
From: Robin Fairbairns <Robin.Fairbairns@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Message-Id: <E14g47m-00006h-00@wisbech.cl.cam.ac.uk>

> Recently we received too many junk mails from
> SC24@dkuug.dk mailing list and I fear those mails 
> will become  more and more.
> 
> I think it is of no use to request DKUUG for improvements
> because for many months before getting junk mails from sc24@dkuug.dk,
> I also got much more junk mails from SC22WG20@dkuug.dk.
> 
> SC22 WG20 people got angry and asked an expert in DKUUG to
> do improvements several times but those requests have been neglected.
> 
> How should we do now?

actually, it's worse even than you say: the dkuug list server hides
the received: lines of the message before it got to it, so that it's
impossible to complain to the isp where the spam originated.

which leads me to conclude that dkuug are entirely bereft of clue as
to running a spam-resistant server.  perhaps an alternative home for
the list is desirable?