Spam detection software, running on the system "avery.infomotions.com", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see eric_morgan_at_infomotions.com for details. Content preview: Like others, I'm a big fan of Brother printers (laser or inkjet) at home.* BUT, as you guessed at the end of your email, it's really not fair to expect to get more than 3 years of continuous use out of a consumer-grade printer. That said, I think the price difference between buying a new consumer-grade printer every 3 years and the upkeep costs of a commercial-grade printer is probably negligible. Plus, it's often much easier to clear paper jams from home printers! [...] Content analysis details: (0.6 points, -1.5 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [66.175.211.245 listed in list.dnswl.org] 3.0 SINGLE_HEADER_3K A single header contains 3K-4K characters -0.6 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS From and EnvelopeFrom 2nd level mail domains are different 0.0 T_HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS From and EnvelopeFrom 2nd level mail domains are different -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000]
attached mail follows:
Like others, I'm a big fan of Brother printers (laser or inkjet) at home.* BUT, as you guessed at the end of your email, it's really not fair to expect to get more than 3 years of continuous use out of a consumer-grade printer. That said, I think the price difference between buying a new consumer-grade printer every 3 years and the upkeep costs of a commercial-grade printer is probably negligible. Plus, it's often much easier to clear paper jams from home printers! --Rachel * Personal opinion, not an official endorsement. -----Original Message----- Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:34:51 -0500 From: Julie Swierczek <jswierc1_at_SWARTHMORE.EDU> Subject: desktop printer for label sheets Oh Collective Wisdom! We use sheets of archival labels to label our document boxes in the archives. I think we buy them from one of the major library suppliers (Gaylord, etc.) although I can't say which for certain. The person who prints the most labels uses a desktop printer for this purpose. After three years of printing mostly labels, the printer will not feed the sheets into the printer any longer. I believe they tried replacing a roller or some such part - I know, I'm being real sketchy on details here, sorry - and it did not improve. You can't even get it to work if you manually feed the label sheet into the printer to help it get started. So, if you were going to buy a relatively-inexpensive - say under $300 - printer for this purpose, knowing you were going to be feeding labels into it all the time, what would you recommend? And, if you think it is ridiculous to expect a desktop printer to handle labels for years at that price, go ahead and say so and recommend whatever more expensive product you think is a good idea. We might just have unrealistic expectations for a desktop printer in that price range. Thanks much. Julie Julie C. Swierczek Librarian for Primary Resources and Metadata Services Swarthmore College Peace Collection and Friends Historical Library jswierc1_at_swarthmore.edu http://www.swarthmore.edu/Library/peace http://www.swarthmore.edu/friends-historical-library she/her/hers This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the email immediately.Received on Thu Feb 23 2017 - 08:44:31 EST