on Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 07:51:26PM -0700, Robin Lynn Frank ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Sunday 21 September 2003 07:11 pm, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > Peace.
>
> I've come to the conclusion that peace is not something that is likely
> to happen on this topic.
If I can't change minds, I'd like to at least make clear that anyone
proceeding with a pure C-R spam response solution is not acting out of
ignorance.
In this case, direct retaliation against the resulting spam is entirely
appropriate.
> Just as there are folks on spam-l that hate c/r because they are too
> stupid to control what enters their mail box,
I've noted multiple instances of C-R proponents, and TMDA proponents
specifically, maligning those who object to C-R:
http://zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/2003-September/007390.html
What I *don't* see is acknowledgement from many C-R proponents, and
numerous high-level TMDA supporters and developers, of the inherent
problems in the C-R solution. Not all -- I've had some illuminating
conversations, and have changed more than a few minds. But far too
many.
> there are folks here who don't care if they generate 1000 challenges
> to people who never sent them mail in the first place.
I'll see you and raise you 186,707:
http://mla.libertine.org/tmda-users/2003-08/msg00085.html
Mike Usmar <m.usmar at actrix.co.nz>
> I'm currently working on a scheme to either hold or redirect mail if
> the DNS doesn't match the host/domain in an effort to reduce the
> chance that I will challenge someone who didn't actually mail me.
This is the direction I would like TMDA to take as a whole.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Defeat EU Software Patents! http://swpat.ffii.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
