> Correct. I'm still wavering if a blog spam list should be part
> of multi. There are programs that use multi but (unadvisedly)
> don't differentiate between the source lists. That kind of
> argues for keeping multi focussed on only mail spam and making
> a blog spam list separate. On the other hand there's much less
> overhead in adding a list internally to multi than setting up
> a whole new list.
My impression, merely from what I'm reading here, is this probably isn't a
problem in this case.
I presume that what would be in the list would be the bad guy's site, just
like the normal surbl. Thus, I don't see a problem if someone uses that
list to vet a mail posting.
Even if there is some way a blog can vet the poster's address at the time
the posting is made, I don't think that is likely to be much of a problem,
if any.
Loren
