Greetings

Not sure what's worse ...
o spammers
o ISPs who don't respond to abuse reports
o blocklists so big they cause collataral damage
o mail admins that use the poorly managed blocklists

Taking out Level3 seems a bit extreme:

http://spambag.org/cgi-bin/spambag?record=level3

oh well - it's only one contact affected (presently).
--
William T***o

William T***o wrote:

> Not sure what's worse ...
> o spammers

> Taking out Level3 seems a bit extreme:

Arguably.

o Backbone and major providers (guess who I'm thinking of here) who
think they're so big and important that even if they do carry spam,
no-one will call them on it.

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 11:34:12 -0000, "William T***o"
<EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:

>Greetings
>
>Not sure what's worse ...
>o spammers
>o ISPs who don't respond to abuse reports
>o blocklists so big they cause collataral damage
>o mail admins that use the poorly managed blocklists
>

We are all the children of god, my son.

Be at peace brother T***o.

<bg>

Matt

"William T***o" <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:

>Greetings
>
>Not sure what's worse ...
>o spammers
>o ISPs who don't respond to abuse reports
>o blocklists so big they cause collataral damage
>o mail admins that use the poorly managed blocklists
>
>Taking out Level3 seems a bit extreme:
>
>http://spambag.org/cgi-bin/spambag?record=level3
>
>oh well - it's only one contact affected (presently).

Dialups that dynamically ***ign ip-addrs make the whole thing an
exercise in futility imo. When you account for dynamically ***igned
ip's, and user-***igned ua's, what you have left to work with isn't a
whole lot.

[I'm connected through a Verizon broadband card, which of course is
implemented as dialup. I think the percentage of dialups is going to
grow instead of shrink. <shrug>]

--
Legacy browsers never heard of emerging standards.
(contact via http://www.ren-prod-inc.com/hug_soft)

Andy Dingley wrote

> o Backbone and major providers (guess who I'm thinking of here) who
> think they're so big and important that even if they do carry spam,
> no-one will call them on it.

Messengers, and the shooting thereof.

--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com

William T***o wrote:
> Greetings
>
> Not sure what's worse ...
> o spammers
> o ISPs who don't respond to abuse reports
> o blocklists so big they cause collataral damage
> o mail admins that use the poorly managed blocklists
>
> Taking out Level3 seems a bit extreme:
>
> http://spambag.org/cgi-bin/spambag?record=level3
>
> oh well - it's only one contact affected (presently).

I for one thank spambag.org for taking a stand against a big spam supporting
ISP. Maybe when they can no longer reach half the internet and they lose all
their "good" paying customers they will wise up, but it maybe too late by
then.

"Viper" <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:

> William T***o wrote:
>> Greetings
>>
>> Not sure what's worse ...
>> o spammers
>> o ISPs who don't respond to abuse reports
>> o blocklists so big they cause collataral damage
>> o mail admins that use the poorly managed blocklists
>>
>> Taking out Level3 seems a bit extreme:
>>
>> http://spambag.org/cgi-bin/spambag?record=level3
>>
>> oh well - it's only one contact affected (presently).
>
> I for one thank spambag.org for taking a stand against a big spam
> supporting ISP. Maybe when they can no longer reach half the internet
> and they lose all their "good" paying customers they will wise up, but
> it maybe too late by then.

AOL. I currently get a lot of comment spam from Hopone.net. They don't
care. Based on what they host, they probably are in for the money, and
it's their policy not to care. Very sad, since they allow hundreds of
sites to be comment spammed.

--
John Need help with SEO? Get started with a SEO report of your site:

--> http://johnbokma.com/websitedesign/seo-expert-help.html

Fleeing from the madness of the Castle Amber - software development jungle
John Bokma <EMAIL REMOVED> stumbled into news:alt.www.webmaster
and said:

> "Viper" <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>
>> William T***o wrote:
>>> Greetings
>>>
>>> Not sure what's worse ...
>>> o spammers
>>> o ISPs who don't respond to abuse reports
>>> o blocklists so big they cause collataral damage
>>> o mail admins that use the poorly managed blocklists
>>>
>>> Taking out Level3 seems a bit extreme:
>>>
>>> http://spambag.org/cgi-bin/spambag?record=level3
>>>
>>> oh well - it's only one contact affected (presently).
>>
>> I for one thank spambag.org for taking a stand against a big spam
>> supporting ISP. Maybe when they can no longer reach half the internet
>> and they lose all their "good" paying customers they will wise up, but
>> it maybe too late by then.
>
> AOL. I currently get a lot of comment spam from Hopone.net. They don't
> care. Based on what they host, they probably are in for the money, and
> it's their policy not to care. Very sad, since they allow hundreds of
> sites to be comment spammed.

ok - the principle is grand, but what's the point of blacklisting a tier-1
ISP when the servers you want to blacklist are all in clearly defined
subsets.

[yes - that is another of them rhetoricals]

Having had a some down-time and a chance to mull it over, I've managed to
answer my own o/p.

Sam has every right to build a blacklist containing whatever he damnwell
chooses.

The bufoons are the admins that knowingly & willingly use blacklists
created by fanatics. Worse, they bounce the spam with a 'user not known
here'.

oh well - I can bounce a message up the link to Level-3 but it won't
change anything.
--
William T***o

http://williamt***o.com/words/what-is-usenet.asp

William T***o wrote:
> ok - the principle is grand, but what's the point of blacklisting a
> tier-1 ISP when the servers you want to blacklist are all in clearly
> defined subsets.

Would you boycott a major retail chain if some of their stores were stealing
from customers and the higher ups in management did nothing?
ie: If your local Wal-Mart was selling DVD players that broke 2 days after
you bought them and they refused to give you a new one or your money back
and you reported them to the head office and they ignored you. Would you
shop at any Wal-Mart again?

Fleeing from the madness of the jungle
Viper <EMAIL REMOVED> stumbled into news:alt.www.webmaster
and said:

> William T***o wrote:
>> ok - the principle is grand, but what's the point of blacklisting a
>> tier-1 ISP when the servers you want to blacklist are all in clearly
>> defined subsets.
>
> Would you boycott a major retail chain if some of their stores were
> stealing
> from customers and the higher ups in management did nothing?
> ie: If your local Wal-Mart was selling DVD players that broke 2 days
> after
> you bought them and they refused to give you a new one or your money back
> and you reported them to the head office and they ignored you. Would you
> shop at any Wal-Mart again?

That's silly - I wouldn't boycot the entire town on the basis of one shop
being 'managed' by ****wits.

--
William T***o

http://williamt***o.com/words/what-is-usenet.asp