Hi,
Note: This is not precisely on-topic for SATalk though it hints that
SPEWS is not the worst you may have to deal with.
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 18:49:06 -0700 Abigail Marshall
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> YD> There are only 2
> YD> places in the whole world that get denied at the MTA here and SB
- Original Message -
From: "Abigail Marshall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Yorkshire Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "spamassassin list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2003 8:49 PM
Subject: Re[2]: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a
YD> There are only 2
YD> places in the whole world that get denied at the MTA here and SBC is the
YD> only one of them that got there by spam. My feelings for them cannot be
YD> expressed without spilling blood. I'm going to shut up now before I
YD> start sounding like a raging nanae-ite :)
Why d
At 8/15/03 08:59 PM , Chuck Mize wrote:
How exactly is a host that knowingly and willingly provides services to a
spammer innocent? It seems to me that vitriol should be directed towards
those providers that rake in the spammer money each month and use their
"innocent bystander" clients as shie
John Rudd wrote:
On Thursday, Aug 14, 2003, at 23:01 US/Pacific, Alan Hodgson wrote:
you should use SPEWS if you choose to
block ISP's who are spam supporters
Which should be read as:
You should use SPEWS if you want to participate in the bullying of "the
little guy".
SPEWS sucks. If there's
On Aug 15, 2003 at 21:18, Rick Macdougall wrote:
>Actually changing ISP's is a lot easier than getting a new citizenship
>in a new country. While I would never use SPEWS to block email, I am
Assuming I have a choice of ISPs in my area, and assuming you'll pay
the setup cost.
--
Satya. http://s
John Rudd wrote:
And you pay taxes to a country that is participating in international
organizations whose agenda ends up degrading foreign cultures and
bombing foreign houses. Even if you're against it, you're supporting
it. So, does that make it ok for agents of those foreign groups to b
--On Friday, August 15, 2003 7:03 AM -0700 John Rudd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You should use SPEWS if you want to participate in the bullying of "the
little guy".
SPEWS sucks. If there's a such thing as "non-violent terrorism*", SPEWS
is its poster child.
(* and I'm not one who jumps on that c
On Thursday, Aug 14, 2003, at 23:01 US/Pacific, Alan Hodgson wrote:
you should use SPEWS if you choose to
block ISP's who are spam supporters
Which should be read as:
You should use SPEWS if you want to participate in the bullying of "the
little guy".
SPEWS sucks. If there's a such thing as
On Friday, Aug 15, 2003, at 00:44 US/Pacific, Yorkshire Dave wrote:
I totally disagree with the innocent victim bit. Sure they're innocent
until they find out, but as soon as they become aware they're on a
spamhaven ISP their next payment makes them a willing spam supporter
not
an innocent victi
On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 15:16, John Rudd wrote:
> On Friday, Aug 15, 2003, at 00:44 US/Pacific, Yorkshire Dave wrote:
> > I totally disagree with the innocent victim bit. Sure they're innocent
> > until they find out, but as soon as they become aware they're on a
> > spamhaven ISP their next payment
- Original Message -
From: "Simon Byrnand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Thomas Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 3:24 AM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer
> > - Original Me
> - Original Message -
> From: "Alan Hodgson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 7:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer
>
>
>> On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 07:02:45PM -0
On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 05:52, Thomas Cameron wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Alan Hodgson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 7:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer
>
&
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 11:52:23PM -0500, Thomas Cameron wrote:
> Um, which description was that? I don't see *any* description of SPEWS
> other than my *opinion* that it sucks. You actually help make my case - you
> are a SPEWS supporter and you call me a liar (and it's "disingenuous") for
> no
On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 05:08, Peter Kiem wrote:
> Hi,
>
> >The upshot of this experience proved to me, once and for all, that
> > blackhole lists are a *bad* (*BAD*) idea unless you, yourself, happen
> > to be administering the list. The whole thing revolves around trust,
> > and a single fals
- Original Message -
From: "Alan Hodgson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 07:02:45PM -0500, Thomas Cameron wrote:
> > Goo
Hi,
>The upshot of this experience proved to me, once and for all, that
> blackhole lists are a *bad* (*BAD*) idea unless you, yourself, happen
> to be administering the list. The whole thing revolves around trust,
> and a single false-positive in a supposedly-trusted list nullifies
> that tr
On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 02:16, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 01:44 PM 8/14/2003 -0700, Doug Roberts wrote:
> >Hi all -
> >
> >We just set up shop at a co-lo, started firing off mails to customers that
> >requested to download our product (a spamassassin-based filter,
> >ironically) and discovered that w
Doug Roberts pleads:
> We just set up shop at a co-lo, started firing off mails to customers that
> requested to download our product (a spamassassin-based filter, ironically)
> and discovered that we are the proud owners of part of a class C that has
> been blocked because the previous owne
At 01:44 PM 8/14/2003 -0700, Doug Roberts wrote:
Hi all -
We just set up shop at a co-lo, started firing off mails to customers that
requested to download our product (a spamassassin-based filter,
ironically) and discovered that we are the proud owners of part of a class
C that has been blocked
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 07:02:45PM -0500, Thomas Cameron wrote:
> Good luck. SPEWS completely sucks - I have a client in a very similar
> situation, and my requests on news.admin.net-abuse.email only got me called
> all kinds of nasty names. The gist of the responses I got was "If you do
> busine
Thomas Cameron writes:
> Good luck. SPEWS completely sucks - I have a client in a very similar
> situation, and my requests on news.admin.net-abuse.email only got me called
> all kinds of nasty names. The gist of the responses I got was "If you do
> business with an ISP that allows spam, allowed
meron Technical Services, Inc.
http://www.camerontech.com/
(512) 454-3200
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 3:44 PM
Subject: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer
> Hi all -
>
Hi all -
We just set up shop at a co-lo, started firing off mails to customers that
requested to download our product (a spamassassin-based filter, ironically)
and discovered that we are the proud owners of part of a class C that has
been blocked because the previous owners were spammers. We we
25 matches
Mail list logo
