On Tue, 15 Dec 2009, Michael Hutchinson wrote:
If everyone could ignore the taunting, and just carry on, there wouldn't
be an issue.
The taunting *is* the issue. The rest of the arguments, about design and
defaults, are carried on by numerous individuals in a quite civilized
manner. But when someone starts throwing arond stupid accusations, then
the person attacked focuses their efforts on 'defending' themselves,
rather than on a fair unbiased review of what *should* be the 'issue'.
To make a point requires nothing more than well-established facts. But
name-calling and mindless accusations are an ego-driven thing. Once
someone invests their arguments with ego, you cannot count on anything
they say being accurate to any degree. They will literally say anything to
advance their 'cause' and 'win' whatever argument they have joined.
Someone has to stir the pot occasionally, and it doesn't hurt to
have someone around that makes you think outside the square.
Interestingly enough, *I* have stirred this same pot a couple of times,
with very little effect. So while it is a reasonable argument that being
offensive and abusive fails to achieve results, I have to admit that being
quiet and deferring in tone also has little effect. So I wonder, what
*does* it take for the 'amateurs' (that would be folks like me! *grin*)
to bring a possible issue to the attention of the people in the 'know',
and have it discussed?
I ask again, on the issue of whitelists, is there a serious issue with
spammers targetting white-listed IP's as favored candidates for hacking?
I'm okay with the answer being 'no'. I'm sure people with large servers
and good statistics could answer this question. But I get no answer at
all. I don't think it is because of any conspiracy. But perhaps the people
who know are just too busy?
- Charles
