Re: [exim] Recipient verify only for non-authenticated users

On Fri, 2011-10-28 at 10:06 +0000, W B Hacker wrote:
> Surely you did not interpret any part of this to have implied that an
> earlier-phase 'accept' was somehow infectious, parasitical, viral, or
> ....wot? child-bearing? ... immortal, even?

Er...

You know what? I have no idea what you're on about.

Yes, I misunderstood your post (for which I acknowledge the fact,
apologise, and will immediately self-immolate with a thorn swatch). I
was thrown by your insistence on demonstrating your extensive
vocabulary ;-)

Graeme