Peter Corlett wrote:
On 16 Mar 2007, at 18:21, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
[...] abusive, spam-supporting tactics such as
callbacks/sender address verification.)
Would you care to expand on why you think sender callback verification
is apparently abusive and supports spam?
I sure don't mind my
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 07:41:58PM -0700, S. Ryan wrote:
However, while it's not really above me to do the same, he could
have removed the email address so spammers aren't adding to that guys
list of problems.
Anti-spam strategies based on concealment and/or obfuscation of addresses
are no
: Possibly OT, definately humor. rDNS is to policy set by
federal law.
Nothing is wrong with what he posted. The guy is a moron. However, I
was taking my 15 min of fame to jab at SORBS policy of listing people
on
their respective lists. It's dysfunctional and broken, but that again
is just my
Could be considered off-topic because it is humor.
I guess a lot of US network operators are going to have to change their
DNS entries because apparently the rDNS policies are now set by federal
law.
http://www.au.sorbs.net/~matthew/funny/rDNS-set-by-federal-law.txt
Regards,
Mat
Typical SORBS behavior. While this guy can demand all he wants, doesn't
mean he will get what he wants or that he's right or wrong.
Personally, we gave up using SORBS because of it's very high
false-positive ratio and we got tired of hearing customers who were
upset because they didn't get
Nothing is wrong with what he posted. The guy is a moron. However, I
was taking my 15 min of fame to jab at SORBS policy of listing people on
their respective lists. It's dysfunctional and broken, but that again
is just my opinion.
Oh and, of course publicly humiliating the guy is
Steve Sobol wrote (on Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 10:31:44PM -0400):
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007, S. Ryan wrote:
Personally, we gave up using SORBS because of it's very high
false-positive ratio
YMMV; at $DAYJOB we don't seem to have the same problem.
I gave up using SORBS (and I'm not Mat's
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007, S. Ryan wrote:
Oh and, of course publicly humiliating the guy is certainly not that
cool. However, while it's not really above me to do the same, he could
have removed the email address so spammers aren't adding to that guys
list of problems.
Fair enough.
--
Nothing is wrong with what he posted. The guy is a moron. However, I
was taking my 15 min of fame to jab at SORBS policy of listing people on
their respective lists.
when 42 other folk have similarly whined, i am not sure the word 'fame'
is appropriate
randy
