lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Apr]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: SPAM filtering - was Re: Mail delivery failed
Date
Followup to:  <370B9F65.CFD0F909@datadesign.com>
By author: Bruce Korb <korb@datadesign.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Bob Lorenzini wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 7 Apr 1999, Riley Williams wrote:
> >
> > > I will also add that in my experience, just denying a site access to
> > > your system because of a few spam merchants thereon is simply
> > > counterproductive and only harms the site doing the denying.
> >
> > I respectfully dissagree on this Riley. I realise you have been
> > inconvienced by this policy but think about the rest of us. You could help
> > by refusing to patronise a provider who caters to net abusers.
>
> Um, so why are _you_ using netcom?
> Try posting to a distribution list on egcs.cygnus.com.
> You cannot do it. The anti-spam campain can get out of hand.
> In fact, it has. It has become emotional rather than rational.
>

Not really. It means Netcom is unwilling to play by the rules, so
other people don't let them play. In other words, Netcom isn't
providing the service that users paid them for -- interconnection --
because they are unwilling to do what it takes to interoperate.

I really believe that if <ISP X> want to be an open conduit for spam,
noone should be required to accept it.

-hpa

--
"The user's computer downloads the ActiveX code and simulates a 'Blue
Screen' crash, a generally benign event most users are familiar with
and that would not necessarily arouse suspicions."
-- Security exploit description on http://www.zks.net/p3/how.asp

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:51    [W:0.511 / U:0.400 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site