[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OT: sorbs blacklisting scam

Matthew Sullivan wrote:
SORBS doesn't collect the money and forward it to charities - the person paying the fine pays to a charity (or SORBS nominated good cause) which will provide a receipt that SORBS admins can verify independently (Yes there are some who forward fake receipts)

I don't feel much for handing over banking information which states the transfer, and that goes double for the company that I am working for. Asking for a receipt from the organisation which accepts the funds could be possible, but even that has given me problems in the past; And I doubt they are going to belive me if I explain them the situation.

It realy amazes me, the lack of immediate information about this "feature". SORBS, independent and all, but no clear overview in how this works.. a lack of advertisment?

Unfortunately all the details are there, just some never read them. The Overview page is a brief information page - the Spam DB FAQ is a full description.

Some? Doubt it. All but some sounds more in the line regarding the amount of postings so far. Listen, e-mail is an added valued service that has been blown out of proportions regarding "importance". It's for most new internet-users the main reason to use the internet at all. If it were true that the mail service (smtp) were only provided by company's with an acceptable amount of "clue" this would be a 'fine' that could have made some sense.

Because of the fact that you demand the $50 it doens't make a diffrence where the money goes to.. except it sounds good and might make you feel better for 50 odd seconds. Still, I lost $50 because somebody made a mess of it that I have to clean up. Still, it's "free" service with a "fine" that somebody that doesn't use the service has to pay for.

Makes sense to you? I don't know.. it's just sounds wrong.
And then..
As you stated, the service that SORBS provides is FAR from perfect.. and I agree (for a diffrent reason that this one).. but I sure as hell wouldn't dare to charge anyone for it if it would be described as "far from perfect" (which sounds like: broken service). It is, IMO a token of arrogance to take SORBS down this road.

I would advice you to take a step back, and withdraw the financial setback for former misuse of a range or single address.

There are diffrent and possible better ways to achieve you goals. This approach is focused on a single entity, SORBS, and does not have and links with other company's (as stated on the site), which makes it sounds like you are group of outlaws like "Robin Hood". And that doesn't realy sound like a nice compliment.

Kind regards,

Reply to: