Re: NEVER USE SORBS - Debian

This is a discussion on Re: NEVER USE SORBS - Debian ; 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 ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Re: NEVER USE SORBS

  1. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    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.
    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;
    fully informed consent. We want to save *ourselves* trouble by doing
    something to stop the one-lobe-active admins out there from loading up SORBS
    and causing a chain reaction that ends up on *our* plates. SORBS *could* do
    something to help the situation but they don't so they get derided for it.
    It's a devil/sinner relationship. The proximate cause of trouble is the
    sinful admin not SORBS even though they created the problem. These are all
    perfectly legitimate positions and are not worthy of derision. They can
    just exist, out there, without threatening any other position on the issue.
    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
    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.






    --
    REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=--
    "...ne cede malis"

    00000100


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  2. 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 ****ing 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 (part time cyborg)


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  3. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 09:27:28 -0400, wagnerc@plebeian.com (Chris
    Wagner) wrote:

    > [ ... good stuff trimmed ... ]


    > At the end of the day nothing matters except keeping people from using
    > SORBS.


    Seconded.

  4. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    John Kelly wrote:
    > On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 09:27:28 -0400, wagnerc@plebeian.com (Chris
    > Wagner) wrote:
    >
    >> [ ... good stuff trimmed ... ]

    >
    >> At the end of the day nothing matters except keeping people from using
    >> SORBS.

    >
    > Seconded.
    >


    Actually, the Open Relay and Zombie databases are pretty useful. They prevent a
    *LOT* of spam. The DUHL list is a completely different thing, but then again
    I've never had any problems in getting static IP's removed from this list.

    Maarten


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  5. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 23:50:45 +1000, Craig Sanders
    wrote:

    >> We want to save *ourselves* trouble by doing
    >> something to stop the one-lobe-active admins


    > lost cause. never going to happen. waste of time. they are beyond any help.


    If you want to bury your head in the sand and ignore problems, that's
    your choice. But don't expect anyone else to follow your example.


    > it's really ****ing irritating


    O, poor baby. Why do keep reading? You can unsubscribe at any time.

    Who do you think you are, the topic police?

+ Reply to Thread