Re: RBL report..
On Sun, 26 Mar 2000, Joseph Carter wrote:
> The point exactly.. If RBL or RSS blacklists someone, it's a known
> spammer or a site which has refused to act against spammers abusing their
> systems. In these instances, the blacklisting happens as a last resort.
But you can't keep up with the amount of spam out there.
> DUL and ORBS both seem to think they need to punish anyone whose config
> or origin does not meet their standards (or as someone else noted in the
> case of ORBS, if they are unable to test you..)
I don't know anything about DUL. ORBS lists people who run open relays,
which is a known and real problem.
> There are those who believe such far-reaching pre-emptive strikes against
> spammers are warranted. I'm not one of them. I believe DUL and ORBS are
> only making the problems worse by resorting to "fighting dirty" without
> regard for the innocent users.
So don't use ORBS on your machines. As for fighting dirty, I think it
could also be argued that blocking relay-checks is "fighting dirty". By
having an open relay, these admins cause a great deal of damage. The
bandwidth that spam eats up alone every day must be immense, world wide.
> These people are typified by Craig Sanders who has said on many occasions
> now in several forums that people who don't like or are hurt by such
> blacklists should simply get a better ISP---as if a lot of people even had
> a choice! Can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs right? That
> sort of uncaring attitude shows exactly how unethical that view (and IMO
> the people who hold it) are.
I care a great deal, that's why I take a look at the greater picture. And
in the long run, everybody is better off if all relays are closed.
"Kif, if there's one thing I don't need it's your 'I don't think that's
--- Zap Brannigan