Re: NEVER USE SORBS
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 09:27:28AM -0400, Chris Wagner wrote:
> At 10:25 PM 7/28/2006 +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> >don't use SORBS if you don't agree with their policies. but stop whining
> >about people who DO agree with them and have chosen to use one or more
> >of their lists.
>
> That's the missing piece of ur argument right there. U assume that everyone
> using SORBS is totally on the same wavelength with them and agrees with
> their philosophy etc etc. That they have made a fully informed decision.
no, i don't. i'm fully aware of the fact that the world is full of
morons who don't know what they're doing, and the internet (being a
subset of the world) is no different. in fact, the 'net makes them far
more visible and far harder to simply ignore and pretend they don't
exist.
i simply don't care. it's their mail server. they can run it in a
moronic fashion if they want to (although if it's an open relay or other
nuisance it will end up being blacklisted).
> Problem is, there are people out there who are only semi aware and come
> across SORBS "hmm, blocks spam, good, I like that, let's use SORBS". Those
> are the people who essentially have let themselves be hornswaggled that
> we're talking about. The devout SORBS follower, sure go ahead and use it;
it's not about being 'devout'. it's about weighing up the pros and cons
and deciding that the tiny risk is worth the massive benefit.
if SORBS DUL ever stops being useful, or becomes a spite list like some
RBLs have become in the past, i'll be the first to dump them. from what
i've seen over the last few years that i've been using their DUL, they
make an honest effort to live up to their documented policy to the best
of their ability.
> We want to save *ourselves* trouble by doing
> something to stop the one-lobe-active admins [...doing anything stupid...]
lost cause. never going to happen. waste of time. they are beyond any help.
> and causing a chain reaction that ends up on *our* plates.
it's their mail server. they can reject mail for whatever reason they like,
including being a complete moron.
> SORBS *could* do something to help the situation but they don't so
> they get derided for it.
what can they do? warn people that you a brain is required to use their
lists? that's not going to work - stupid people mostly don't realise
they're stupid. and those that do realise it certainly don't want to
admit it, not if their job depends on getting the mail system working.
SORBS isn't responsible for stupid people.
> The best thing to do is educate the net about SORBS. At the end of
> the day nothing matters except keeping people from using SORBS. The
> way to do that is to create enough web pages on the subject that more
> anti SORBS than pro
good. go and create web pages about it. those who care can read about
it. and those who don't can get on with life without the constant
aggravating whine of self-centred jerks who keep demanding that everyone
else should change their practices to accomodate them.
but whatever you do, just stop whinging about it on this list every few
weeks. it's really fucking irritating.
> SORBS pages come up in search engines. So y'all that feel that strongly
> about it, start writing posts and putting up pages so that we get good
> message saturation. Debating the finer points of the SORBS terms is not
> germaine.
excellent propaganda principles. facts don't matter. just whine long and
loud enough and drown out any rational argument.
craig
--
craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au> (part time cyborg)
Reply to: