Re: Every spam is sacred
On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 12:46:48AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 02:18:57AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > They have said "no" using (more or less) the following reasoning:
> > Since Debian machines have been listed in several DNSBLs in the past,
> > we should not use ANY of them ourselves (which is like saying: since
> > we have sent tons of spam in the past via our mailing lists, we should
> > accept ALL the spam we receive). Does somebody understand this?
>
> How about, "because we have been unfairly listed as being spammers and
> had our mail blocked, even though we were innocent, we refuse to
> participate and endorse a system which in the past as been used to
> unfairly block innocents, including who were unfortunate enough to
> share netblocks with those whose political views were at odds from
> those who had run DNSBL's?"
Putting all DNSBLs in such a large pot is akin to saying "I refuse to run
RedHat because other operating system vendors like Microsoft are unethical."
I have no doubt that some DNSBLs do have those problems (and in fact they
do). They does not mean that ALL do.
Reply to: