Re: Every spam is sacred
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003 10:40:45 -0500, John Goerzen <email@example.com> said:
> 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.
They all have the problem of basing their refusal on the basis
of an IP address block, not on the contents of the email.
Spam is determined by the contents of the email, not by the
factr that someone in that IP block may have sopammed some one else
at some point in the mists of time.
Sacher's Observation: Some people grow with responsibility -- others
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C