Keep in mind that freedon of speech says that you can stand in the park on a
soapbox and shout.
It does NOT say that passers-by are forced to stand there and listen to you
until you run out of voice. They can walk away any time they want to.
It also does not say that the local newspaper is
When business and government are in bed together to silence dissent then yes it
is a violation of the 1st amendment.
Under the terms of their establishment certain businesses cannot prohibit
dissent (freedom to speak).
Private individuals have no authority to prohibit freedom of speech.
One thing to be aware of. There is no 1st Amendment Right associated
with any business entity or private person. The guarantees apply to
US government and whether or not they can censor what you say.
I would suspect governments use something more advanced than SA that costs
thousands of times
On 20201120 18:35:35, noel.but...@ausics.net wrote:
On 2020-11-21 04:59, Jakob Curdes wrote:
To all: please also rememember that this list is international and not
every corner of the world is interested in the way the current
conflicts in the U.S. are handled.
well said!
Or, in other
On 2020-11-21 04:59, Jakob Curdes wrote:
To all: please also rememember that this list is international and not
every corner of the world is interested in the way the current
conflicts in the U.S. are handled.
well said!
Or, in other words, the Nth amendment is part of the U.S.
Dealing with spam from spammers takes up time that could be spent doing
profitable tasks. In other words it wastes resources not only of the
end-user having to sort through 100 bad emails to get to 2 good emails
(which I've dealt with) but for IT departments having to spend hours
trying to
On 11/20/20 5:02 PM, Jay Plesset wrote:
You have a right to say what you want.
s/You have/You (largely) have/
There are specific things that are forbidden by law. E.g. yelling fire
in a movie theater when there isn't a fire.
I have a right to ignore you.
Hear! Hear!
Also, it's my
And...
Ultimately, does the Creator--the author of rights--sanction the
harassment of and theft from others by spammers.
On 11/20/2020 4:59 PM, Eric Broch wrote:
It's a given people on this side of the argument don't like spam, your
conclusion being correct, it still comes down to
I think this argument is sort of odd. Here is my take:
You have a right to say what you want.
I have a right to ignore you.
Spam filtering allows me to exercise my right to ignore you.
jay plesset, IT director. D. P. Design
On 11/20/2020 3:59 PM, Eric Broch wrote:
It's a given people on
It's a given people on this side of the argument don't like spam, your
conclusion being correct, it still comes down to preference. They prefer
sending spam you prefer they didn't.
They, ERRONEOUSLY, justify sending spam using a political argument
(*their protected right), our side is
On 11/20/2020 4:59 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
non-profit stuff in the US is EXEMPT from CAN-SPAM, so they don’t even
have to play by the rules
still, that doesn't give them a free pass to the inbox, or prevent them
from potentially getting listed on an anti-spam list. MANY spammers that
> On Nov 20, 2020, at 4:45 PM, Rob McEwen wrote:
>
> On 11/20/2020 4:37 PM, Eric Broch wrote:
>> It seems spammers are using political arguments to justify their actions.
>> I'll give them credit, at least they're trying to justify what they do by
>> something greater than (outside of)
On 11/20/2020 4:37 PM, Eric Broch wrote:
It seems spammers are using political arguments to justify their
actions. I'll give them credit, at least they're trying to justify
what they do by something greater than (outside of) themselves, albeit
wrongly.
It seems people on this side of the
On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 10:28:52 -0800 (PST)
John Hardin wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2020, Philipp Ewald wrote:
>
> > On my freemail-account i got this kind of email too so i thought
> > maybe there will be a Blacklist for this kind of SPAM.
>
> ...
>
> > Thanks for contact BLABLALBA
> >
> > Your
It seems spammers are using political arguments to justify their
actions. I'll give them credit, at least they're trying to justify what
they do by something greater than (outside of) themselves, albeit wrongly.
It seems people on this side of the argument want to jettison politics
(and
Hi,
On 20/11/2020 20:46, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Philipp are these spam using things like Google forms for spam? If so,
take a look at KAM.cf on mcgrail.com, we've added a number of rules to
combat those recently.
BTW, anyone willing to test the KAM channel? We've got it in
production use
On Fri, 20 Nov 2020, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Philipp are these spam using things like Google forms for spam? If so, take a
look at KAM.cf on mcgrail.com, we've added a number of rules to combat those
recently.
There are also Google Docs rules in the base ruleset that should catch
that.
Am 20.11.2020 um 15:59 schrieb AJ Weber:
On 11/20/2020 9:28 AM, @lbutlr wrote:
A whole lot of people have decided their right to free speech means an obligation from others to
listen to them. It's not just spammers, it's also racists, fascists, republicans, and god-botherers.
I think you
Philipp are these spam using things like Google forms for spam? If so,
take a look at KAM.cf on mcgrail.com, we've added a number of rules to
combat those recently.
BTW, anyone willing to test the KAM channel? We've got it in production
use for a while now.
Regards,
KAM
On 11/20/2020
On Fri, 20 Nov 2020, Philipp Ewald wrote:
On my freemail-account i got this kind of email too so i thought maybe there
will be a Blacklist for this kind of SPAM.
...
Thanks for contact BLABLALBA
Your Text to us:
SPAM
This looks like abuse of a web-based feedback form at alnatura.de; they
Philipp Ewald skrev den 2020-11-20 19:08:
nope i will check spamassassin for more "low" volume services
URIBL provides public lookups over DNS for low volume usage. If you
spam check a large amount of email, or you use a shared DNS platform
for resolution, you may receive a response
nope i will check spamassassin for more "low" volume services
URIBL provides public lookups over DNS for low volume usage. If you spam check
a large amount of email, or you use a shared DNS platform for resolution, you
may receive a response saying the query was refused.
we have a
Philipp Ewald skrev den 2020-11-20 18:52:
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.526
X-Spam-Level: +
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.526 tagged_above=- required=5
tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.723, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001]
On 11/20/20 6:41 PM, Marc Roos wrote:
Url blacklists? Maybe paste some headers here?
Not real URL Blacklist.
On my freemail-account i got this kind of email too so i thought maybe there
will be a Blacklist for this kind of SPAM.
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.901
X-Spam-Level: +
Url blacklists? Maybe paste some headers here?
-Original Message-
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: contact from blacklist
Hi everyone,
lately I get more and more spam from so called contact forms.
Does anyone know a blacklist for this?
Kind regards
Philipp
--
Philipp
Hi everyone,
lately I get more and more spam from so called contact forms.
Does anyone know a blacklist for this?
Kind regards
Philipp
--
Philipp Ewald
Administrator
DigiOnline GmbH, Probsteigasse 15 - 19, 50670 Köln
Fax: +49 221 6500-690, E-Mail: philipp.ew...@digionline.de
AG Köln HRB
On Fri, 20 Nov 2020, AJ Weber wrote:
I think you should keep politics out of this.
+1
*PLEASE*
--
John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhar...@impsec.org pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76
Thanks for the update! Although I am not really an advocate for blocking
people.
-Original Message-
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: What can one do abut outlook.com?
On 26/10/20 5:17 am, Marc Roos wrote:
>> make a reality check outside your small bubble!
> typical
On 11/20/2020 9:28 AM, @lbutlr wrote:
A whole lot of people have decided their right to free speech means an
obligation from others to listen to them. It's not just spammers, it's also
racists, fascists, republicans, and god-botherers.
I think you should keep politics out of this. If I want
On 19 Nov 2020, at 14:25, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> So over the years, I have gotten a lot of complaints from spammers about how
> I'm breaking their 1st amendment rights by blocking their spam as free
> speech. I've had to explain that I'm not the government and hence there are
> no 1st
In summation the Bill of Rights (1-10 amendments) protects (or is
supposed to protect) the life, liberty, and property of the individual
from abuse by the newly created government and are commands of the
people to this governments' servants.
If I tell one child not to draw on the walls with
31 matches
Mail list logo
