But it is almost universally accepted that filtering emails that sell
"penis enlargement equipment" is OK.  The overwhelming majority of users
consider those as spam and not a false positive when filtered.  On the
other hand, when an AOL user can't receive an email from their mom who
happens to be a DSL user, they will probably consider that as a false
positive.  

I think this argument can be consolidated down to what "most" users will
consider to be spam vs. ham or a false positive.  My only hope is that
the AOL users who cannot receive email they want to receive will cause
enough stink in the press, that the whole thing back fires in their
face.  But I expect AOL will "spin" the story the other way to their
users and blame the "other guys" for making a policy decision not to
take "DSL" out of the rDNS.  I feel confident that AOL will accuse the
"other guys" of supporting spam instead of admitting the implications of
the policy decision they have made.

Todd Holt
Xidix Technologies, Inc
Las Vegas, NV  USA
www.xidix.com


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bryan Samis
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 1:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] OT: AOL's got nerve

R. Scott Perry wrote:
> 
>> I have to disagree with you. AOL has made a policy choice, and you
have
>> chosen an ISP that won't let you change your rDNS. You should
complain to
>> your ISP, and not to AOL.
> 
> 
> Again, when you are dealing with a multi-million dollar corporation
that 
> you are lucky to have providing Internet access, it isn't always 
> possible to get them to do things they aren't required to the RFCs to
do.
> 
> Until a few days ago, the contents of the reverse DNS entry were not 
> important.  Why should someone have to switch Internet providers (if 
> that is even possible!) all of a sudden, when their Internet provider 
> isn't even doing anything wrong?

The fact of the matter, in my opinion, is that AOL is taking an action 
that is within their means to reduce the amount of spam that reaches 
their mail servers. That is their perogative. Arguing that they have no 
right to do so or that it's unfair holds about as much water as me 
arguing that your statistical spam filter hinders my ability to e-mail a

client information about my penis size enhancing product. I can bitch 
and moan all I want about this, but nobody's going to remove those 
keywords from their filters because the amount the spam they do block is

worth the tradeoff of killing a few legit messages.

Bryan Samis
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus
(http://www.declude.com)]


---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]


To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/

Reply via email to