Re: Every spam is sacred
Please, respect my headers and avoid multiple messages, I read -devel.
On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 03:20:54PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > Completeley different situations...
>
> And? Same spirit, different situations, I agree.
Not for me. Or any choice is terrorism for you...
> > is there a rule for us about spam? should we accept mail from all
> > over the world, even if it's surely spam? And BTW we were talking
> > about *tagging* mail from IPs in RBLs.
>
> You are wrong.
>
> Please re-read Santiago Villa mail.
>
> "Hmm, SPEWS is well known for blocking innocent people. Their
> idea is that causing some collateral damage to innocent users
> when their ISP host spammers will cause those people to choose
> another ISP which does not host spammers. Only when the bad
> ISPs see this way they lose a lot of money they will stop
> hosting spammers. This is certainly an interesting idea to
> fight spammers [...] "
>
> This is clearly not about tagging, which is not "causing some
> collateral damage to innocent user" by "blocking innocent people".
This a way to fight spam... I don't want a strong fight againts spam by
debian, at this moment. :)
> As my message was a direct reply to this one, this is what "we were
> talking about".
>
> Now, you raise the possibility to only tag these mails, and it seems
> acceptable to me.
It's the proposal... probably you didn't read all messages.
bye
Christian
Reply to: