SPAM is SPAM, HAM is HAM. CAMSPAM is just an advisory. If you (even being a provider of a list) have sufficient reasons to tag something as potential spam you have the right to. Though [ob] is a public list that we don't have to use. We use it because it's a) there and b) provides a good listing of those people who send unsolicited bulk email. I didn't subscibe for the political part that sent me unsolicited spam (which was BCC'd to a list) and didn't appreciate their views. As such, if I'm forced to accept this then I can send a reply, or 1.5 million of them, back saying they need to remove me. Either way, it's bad practice, though acceptable by some peoples standards. This is a choice they made (just like very other spammer). The only difference between them and normal spammers is, well, nothing. While we're on the topic let me point out one thing (which you can correct me if I'm wrong and I know you will :)). RBL's provide us with a list of people who have reportedly send unsolicited bulk email (UBE). This doesn't necessarilly quantify spam. It quantifies that these people are just sending out emails to unsuspecting users without their direct previous authorization. Spam is such as ugly word as it has legal ramifications to it. As a subscriber to an UBE you are accepting that the list provides a somewhat accurate list of those companies, domains or IP's that have been know to send UBE in the past. These messages my not quantify spam but they are UBE which is what you using [ob] for. Gary
________________________________ From: Tim Litwiller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri 7/9/2004 11:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ob.surbl.org FP IMHO just because CAMSPAM makes it legal for spammers if they follow specific rules that is no reason not continue to block them. If an organization has sent unsolicited bulk email they can't be trusted not to do it again. > >There was some discussion on this on the spam-l list. It is a question of >policy and opinion. They did send out Unsolicited Bulk email. But CANSPAM >makes it 'ok' to do this for politics. > >The discussion seemd to point to the idea that antispam people don't agree >that it is 'ok' to do this. And some people have been blocking it. > >IMHO I think all political unsolicited bulk email should be blocked. But I >have a larger responsibility to more users of SURBL. So I didn't add it to >[WS]. > >--Chris > > >
