On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Cord Beermann wrote: > > Except that, in some sense, we are already in the hands of non-Debian > > parties. Just take a look at the spam stored in the list archives. > > No. all filters are is in the Hand of Debian listmasters. It's our > decision how we weight suggestions from RBLs we maybe use.
I have never put that in doubt. > You suggest that we should use an RBL as the only criteria if we > accept mail or if we bounce it. I hope you mean "reject" here, as a bounce and a reject are very different things. I have never talked about bounces. In either case, that was not exactly my suggestion. What I propose, mainly, is that you do something about the 0% feedback ratio problem. The suggestion to use a good DNSBL is just a suggestion, and it would be just a partial fix. You don't like third party DNSBLs? Fine, you could still go ahead and create your own one which is even better than the best third party one and it's also in the hands of Debian. You don't like DNSBLs at all? (which seems to be the case). Fine as well, but then the extremely poor feedback ratio problem is still there. What do you have in mind, if any, for the 0% feedback problem, then? The mere fact that someone submitted a bug for this suggests that it is not a problem to be ignored. BTW: I think it would be good if you could please stop calling it RBL, as RBL is a proper name (of MAPS RBL, the very first DNSBL created). DNSBL is the commonly accepted term. See the Wikipedia entry for details. Thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
