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

Re: "Antispam UOL" spam from petsupermarket@uol.com.br?

Rogério Brito wrote:
On Nov 17 2005, Realos wrote:

Maybe, I need to take time to report'm on the blacklist server lists.

This attitude would punish a lot of users, "thank you". For example,
since they are my ISP, I'm using them as a relay.


And, yet, you don't get such stupid messages from me. The fact is that a
stupid challenge-response method is used by a stupid user that
subscribed to a mailing list without disabling it (at least partially).

Also agreed.

The solution would be to punish just that person, not the whole bunch of
people that may have it as the only option for connection and that may
contribute to the project.

Respectfully, I disagree with you on this point. I suggest that first
it be ascertained *why* we are getting such messages. If the act was
malicious (which I doubt), then it makes some sense to discuss
"punishment" like banning (one subscriber). But if (as I tend to
believe) it was an oversight or just plain ignorance, then the
solution is rather different, don't you think? I now begin to
doubt oversight, as the causer would have noticed by now,
and repaired the defect. So I tend to believe it is due to ignorance.

Now, isn't part of the reason for existence of this mail echo the
education of the ignorant?

Let's find the cause, find the reason for the challenges, and then

This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!

Reply to: