On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 09:50:47AM +0100, Gordan wrote: > On Thursday 25 September 2003 03:06, fish wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 08:31:55PM -0500, Pascal wrote: > > > Interesting story on Slashdot today. I wonder how hard it would be to > > > implement in Freenet? > > > > > > http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/09/24/132216 > > > > Yes, just what we need, an RBL list that is even less fucking accountable. > > > > This has 'bad idea' written all over it. > > I see the reasoning behind what you are saying, but nobody is forcing anyone > to use any RBL. If a RBL is too draconian for you, don't use it. For one that > errs more on the side of caution. > > RBLs DO help. Period. I have mail logs that prove it. Instead of 50%+ of my > email being spam, it is down to about 5%. That is clearly a very positive > result. If you have to download the email to spam check it, then you have > already taken a bandwidth hit for the whole lot, so milters are a _second_ > line of defense. > > But again, we are getting off topic.
Both my ISP and my dyndns address have been occasionally rejected by RBLs and such crap. I have never ran an open relay. And getting a better ISP would cost a lot of money and hassle. > > Gordan -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
