Re: Frank Carmickle and Marco Paganini must die
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 10:43:17 -0700, Adam McKenna <email@example.com> said:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 12:50:43AM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
>> I never encountered this problem when I was on dial-up. With my
>> previous ADSL ISP (whose mail servers were utterly unreliable), I
>> found that I was intermittently being blocked by AOL and
>> Sourceforget for being "trespass spam" and on the "dial-up list".
>> I have found only one person blocking my current ADSL provider
>> (who not only seem capable of running decent mail relays which
>> filter spam passing through than and even *gasp* deliver mail on
>> time; but also provide static IPs to all their customers). Since I
>> am the primary (and only) MX for my domain, I see no reason why I
>> should not be sending mail directly from my home mail server.
> If you have a static IP, there's no reason you shouldn't. You
> probably won't end up on any dynamic IP blacklists, and if you do,
> it should be easy to get removed. Your situation is much different
> than someone running Linux who is dialing into the same IP pool that
> a bunch of worm-infected windows spambots are using.
Hell, consider this. Here I am on a 3 week business trip,
sitting in one of these anonymous little building associated with
DARPA (well, actually one of the ubiquitous three letter acronym
"sensitive" labs). I have access to an internet connection, but not
to the servers in the facility -- (I may not have clearance, and
certainly the data transmitted would not be allowed there). I get a
dynamic IP for net access.
I see one of these emails that require a role response, and,
rather than making everyone wait for weeks, I respond.
Damned if I think it is my problem if people actively choose to
ignore my message.
Brook's Law: Adding manpower to a late software project makes it
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C