Re: Microsoft SPAM!!! Complain at magazines ;)
On Fri, 2002-03-08 at 13:55, Erich Schubert wrote:
> > Received: from unknown (HELO lbrout13.listbuilder.com) (204.71.191.17)
> > by murphy.debian.org with SMTP; 8 Mar 2002 03:49:09 -0000
> > Received: (qmail 77847 invoked by uid 0); 8 Mar 2002 03:33:15 -0000
> >
> > lbrout13.listbuilder.com is clearly a microsoft server. And what about
> > the "qmail invoked by uid 0" thing? :))
>
> Your right ;) i had just looked at the ip which didn't resolve (unknown)
> but it's an ip from the link-exchange netblock, which is Microsoft.
>
> > They have send the message, not the client.
>
> And they're free to sue their client if he did misuse their systems and
> violated their terms of use to get the money back actually.
>
> > > > It'd make for amusing DWN reading if it were paid.
>
> And it certainly would be a signal to spammers: we're fighting back.
Sorry to be the person that rains on everyone's parade. But, debian has
never(is that right never?) enforced the policy, so basically it makes
it null and void. Debian would have to write a new version of the
policy, then send that policy out to all the lists saying that this is
the new policy and if you want to keep using the list you have to agree
to it. Then one would have to start enforcing the policies for anyone
and everyone that sends spam to the lists. Personally I would recommend
that debian does this because if debian started enforcing the spam
policy debian would have a lot more money for development, and people
would stop spamming the lists, sorry but that is just my opinion. Feel
free to flame me if I am wrong on any point. Peace kid.
--
-Scott Henson
shenson2@wvu.edu
Reply to: