Re: Every spam is sacred
On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 05:29:41PM +0200, Jesus Climent wrote:
> > I repeat: a DNSBL is not software, nor documentation, it's an opinion,
> > or the reflect of a fact ("the DSBL server has received a message
> > saying "listme" from IP "foo" and contains cookie "bar").
> >
> > If we refuse to use anything we can't modify (when it's not software),
> > we would have to stop reading the RFCs, but I don't think this would
> > be a good thing for free software.
>
> RFC's are standard definitions, and can be redistributed. The list you propose
> to use can be modified, but not redistributed.
>
> You are proposing to use a method that cannot be delivered to our users. And I
> do not think that is a good idea.
Come on now, that's so obviously calling for reductio ad absurdum.
We also use hardware that cannot be delivered to our users! :)
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Reply to: