On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 08:45:09PM +0100, "Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero" 
> Who had this great idea? Like the one about disallowing AnonCVS to any
> machine without name, weird. If the thing is antispam, why not use

that's obviously not antispam-related but an amdinistrators error ;)

> some kind of auth? If done, do it right, instead of kicking normal
> users. And if not antispam... why did it?

well, some people, desperate to fight spam, use strange methods to do that,
firewalling more users than spammers (DUL), even worse, they do it on
mail-hubs or list-servers, therefore taking policy away from users and
forcing some policy on them they never asked for.

My guess is that many admins just look for as many "anti-spam-blocklists"
they can find (RBL, oh, ORBS, oh, DUL, cool), without actually reading
about them (or, as is the case for ORBS, believing the webpages which say
it would be a list of open relays, which it isn't).

Anyway, that's creative anarchy as itr always was, except maybe that the
number of admins has increased (and the overall quality decreased).

      -----==-                                             |
      ----==-- _                                           |
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann      +--
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       [EMAIL PROTECTED]      |e|
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\       XX11-RIPE         --+
    The choice of a GNU generation                       |
Gimp-user mailing list

Reply via email to