On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 07:28:22 -0800 Marc Perkel <m...@perkel.com> wrote:
> If you think about it, if Barracuda, a spam filtering company, > started selling access to spammers, how long do you think Barracuda > would stay in business. To quote Dean Drako of Barracuda on a 2008 visit to the UK "Just sell them anything and we will worry about it afterwards" Draw your own conclusions. > Their customers who got the spam would move > elsewhere. So I really don't think that Barracuda is going to sell > out their main business to make $20 off of a few spammers. If it's so clear cut, why is the option for the owner of the said Barracuda spam device *not* able to disable emailreg.org, but they *can* disable the Barracuda whitelist 'proper'? When asked on this point Justin O Brien of Barracuda said 'We don't want them switching it off'. Why? Possibly because it is a paid to spam, pay to bypass Barracuda list??? If you expand that into Spamassassin then that really is going to look corrupt. Please at least try and disguise it a little bit better than that, FFS. Don't underestimate those $20 payments. The last time I looked scale of economy was alive and well given sufficient market. Drako, Perone et al don't do anything unless there is more than the price of a cup of tea in it for them. I'm sorry if people take offence to that, but it has foundations in reality. A place that seems to scare some people. -- This e-mail and any attachments may form pure opinion and may not have any factual foundation. Please check any details provided to satisfy yourself as to suitability or accuracy of any information provided. Data Protection: Unless otherwise requested we may pass the information you have provided to other partner organisations.
