minor list changes

[Eric Smith]

I wrote:
> I did away with my backup server.  Spamming software often seems to
> ignore precedence, though I'm not sure whether that's deliberate or
> sloppiness.

Tom wrote:
> The exploit is based upon the fact that the destination host
> rejects unknown users; MX backups, not having that information,
> generally accept *@domain, so the spammer hack is to find the
> n>0th MX host, and queue it all up there. SPreads the load.

I don't see how it "spreads the load" or how the spammer benefits
in any way.  The spammer wants to get the spam to as many valid
email addresses as possible, but sending to the backup MX doesn't
get it to more valid email addresses, and it doesn't reduce the
load on the spammer's sending machine.

Eric