Re: [tlug] Re: orbz test

[Matt Doughty <mdoughty@example.com>]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 11:04:38AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> >>>>> "wileyc" == Christopher SEKIYA <wileyc@example.com> writes:
> 
>     wileyc> On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 06:21:37PM +0100, Tobias Diedrich
>     wileyc> wrote:
>     >> Reading this it seems the only way to be sure not to get
>     >> blocked by orbz.org sometimes is to have your own mailserver,
>     >> not in a dialup, with a correct domain setup and no other users
>     >> that could misuse it...
> 
>     wileyc> ... which is the way it should be.
> 
> Oh, jeez, Chris, did you just say that nobody who doesn't geek
> sysadmin should have reliable sending privileges?  Another bad week, I
> take it.
> 
Heh, Chris probably thinks that on a good day *G*. Still until spammers
are hunted down and drawn and quartered to the delight of the cheering
masses it is the only real solution.  It might not be the way it should
be, but unless something changes draconian filtering is the only thing
that is going to stop the floods.  Everyone who gets blocked because of
the poor practices of their ISP are unfortunate colateral damage, and
obviously if you are anonymously sending mail(lacking a proper domain) 
you can't really expect to be trusted since for every legitimate
sender there will be probably 100 spammers. 

--Matt
-- 
"Take away them collisions and the common channel and it's like Christianity 
 without Christ." -Jim Breen (speaking about "full-duplex" Ethernet)