Re: [Fwd: Re: Spamassasin over RBL, was Re: rblsmtpd -t?]
Hi,
On Tue, 7 May 2002, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Tue, May 07, 2002 at 10:25:12AM +0200, Emile van Bergen wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 May 2002, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > > no, it's not relative. there is an absolute, black-and-white
> > > criteria which you are too stupid to see: if a site is part of the
> > > spam problem then it should be black-listed. if it is not part of
> > > the problem then it shouldn't be listed.
> >
> > Pray tell then, *when* is a site part of the spam problem?
> >
> > Please share your infallible, absolute, black-and-white criteria for
> > that, because obviously we were missing it all along.
>
> yes, you have missed it because i've mentioned it several times in this
> thread. here it is spelt out so that even you or jason should be able
> to understand it:
>
> 1. is the site an open relay?
That is a good one, but doesn't catch all cases. You recognise that too:
> 2. is the site a spam source?
That's my point. *Where* is your threshold? *When* do you, with absolute
certainty, conclude that a site is a spam source?
Cheers,
Emile.
--
E-Advies / Emile van Bergen | e-advies@evbergen.xs4all.nl
tel. +31 (0)70 3906153 | http://www.e-advies.info
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: