nanog mailing list archives
RE: sorbs.net
From: "David Schwartz" <davids () webmaster com>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:05:55 -0800
SORBS -- like _any_ other blocklist -- is simply an expression of opinion. if you feel that "somebody" is 'wrongly' blocking mail because of a SORBS listing, your _first_ step should be to contact *that* party, and request that either (a) they stop using SORBS, or (b) that they 'whitelist' you. *THEY* are the ones that made the decision to block your mail to their system.
Come on, that's just nonsense. If the New York Times publishes a front page article about how you're an idiot, should you contact each individual person who reads the article and try to convince them you're not? Or should you try to convince the New York Times that they're incorrect and should publish a correction? DS
Current thread:
- Re: sorbs.net, (continued)
- Re: sorbs.net Paul G (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Steve Sobol (Mar 16)
- Re: sorbs.net Robert Bonomi (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Micah McNelly (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Dave Dennis (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Steve Gibbard (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Dan Hollis (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Michael . Dillon (Mar 16)
- Re: sorbs.net Jay Hennigan (Mar 16)
- Re: sorbs.net Micah McNelly (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Bruce Campbell (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Paul G (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Randy Bush (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Rich Kulawiec (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Paul G (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Rich Kulawiec (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Jason Slagle (Mar 21)
- Message not available
- Re: sorbs.net Jay R. Ashworth (Mar 21)
- Re: sorbs.net Suresh Ramasubramanian (Mar 21)