I've been blocked twice this morning, and removed myself once - the first time, by the time I got to work and looked at the list, it was already gone. My hosting provider works with those jerks at manitu. I've ranted a number of times over the years at why their method is a *lousy* method for blocking spam in the second decade of the 21st century.
Now this: here's another argument as to why the CentOS list should stop using them... when I went to remove myself, the email that told me I'd been blocked, also said who'd reported my mailserver (that is, hostmonster's mailserver) as sending spam was someone at selfip.biz. Go do a whois on them - it's someone at home, using dyndns, not an open obvious company. This means that anyone who gets annoyed at *anyone* served by any ISP can report them, and block everyone at that ISP.
Go ahead, tell me this is *reasonable* in 2013.
mark
Actually, Manitu, also known as NIXSpam, is quite a good list. I've been using only this one and Spamhaus for years. Very good FP:Spam ratio.
I, too, had an issue with the list lately and contacted the maintainer of the project who gave me a good explanation of why Facebook servers may be listed on it (they don't stop sending to discontinued users that have been bouncing for at least half a year).
If the mailserver of your provider sends spam it's absolutely fine to put it on the list. Or, in other words, that's what the list is for in the first place. If Hostmonster feels that there is only few spam running over their servers and they cannot get this down to zero (which is reasonable) then they can contact them and ask to be put on the whitelist.
I don't know what you mean by "My hosting provider works with those jerks at manitu". Does your hosting provider use them to block you? Or does he work with them to resolve the issue?
selfip.biz
I don't see the relevance. You should provide the URL, so one could actually check the headers of the mail (it doesn't list the content) and decide if it could have been spam. If it indeed was spam (either by content or by definition) I don't see what's wrong with putting it on the list according to list policy. selfip.biz is actually a domain they use for their spamtraps. So, this mail was sent to a spamtrap. One could argue whether a mailserver should send to hostname.selfip.biz at all as it may be not be a real mailserver (but you don't know). But that's a different story.
Most of the time RBLs are fine as long as people don't get on them themselves :-)
Kai
On 05/12/13 18:19, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Actually, Manitu, also known as NIXSpam, is quite a good list. I've been using only this one and Spamhaus for years. Very good FP:Spam ratio.
I, too, had an issue with the list lately and contacted the maintainer of the project who gave me a good explanation of why Facebook servers may be listed on it (they don't stop sending to discontinued users that have been bouncing for at least half a year).
If the mailserver of your provider sends spam it's absolutely fine to put it on the list. Or, in other words, that's what the list is for in the first place. If Hostmonster feels that there is only few spam running over their servers and they cannot get this down to zero (which is reasonable) then they can contact them and ask to be put on the whitelist.
I don't know what you mean by "My hosting provider works with those jerks at manitu". Does your hosting provider use them to block you? Or does he work with them to resolve the issue?
selfip.biz
I don't see the relevance. You should provide the URL, so one could actually check the headers of the mail (it doesn't list the content) and decide if it could have been spam. If it indeed was spam (either by content or by definition) I don't see what's wrong with putting it on the list according to list policy. selfip.biz is actually a domain they use for their spamtraps. So, this mail was sent to a spamtrap. One could argue whether a mailserver should send to hostname.selfip.biz at all as it may be not be a real mailserver (but you don't know). But that's a different story.
Most of the time RBLs are fine as long as people don't get on them themselves :-)
Kai
The problem here is that Mark is using a shared hostmonster smtp server to relay outbound mail, and from time to time they relay spam and get blacklisted for it. We've experienced a similar thing from time to time where we have a server hosted with hostmonster that sends out notification emails which are relayed via shared hostmonster mail servers, and occasionally we get bounce notifications where hostmonster's outbound relays are blacklisted (I have mostly noticed them being blacklisted by SpamCop).
If it's important I'd suggest not using shared resources for your outbound mail. If you use a dedicated server (with it's own IP) for outbound mail you will know it's clean and hopefully not get blacklisted. You get what you pay for.
Simple fact in the second decade of the 21st century is "their server, their rules". If someone wants to block you they can and they will. If your outbound server is spamming me I'd block you too. I don't care how many other people might be using it. It's not difficult to prevent outgoing spam, be responsible or be blocked. My server, my rules.
As you've found out, twice now, it's highly effective and gets people's attention. As it's got your attention twice now, I'd suggest you either get used to it or move your outbound mail to a clean host. It's been going on long enough now that it's pretty obvious hostmonster don't care (if it's on my radar, it must have caught their attention - after all, it's their servers). They are happy to keep taking your money.
Ned Slider wrote:
On 05/12/13 18:19, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Actually, Manitu, also known as NIXSpam, is quite a good list. I've been using only this one and Spamhaus for years. Very good FP:Spam ratio.
I, too, had an issue with the list lately and contacted the maintainer of the project who gave me a good explanation of why Facebook servers may be listed on it (they don't stop sending to discontinued users that have been bouncing for at least half a year).
If the mailserver of your provider sends spam it's absolutely fine to put it on the list. Or, in other words, that's what the list is for in the first place. If Hostmonster feels that there is only few spam running over their servers and they cannot get this down to zero (which is reasonable) then they can contact them and ask to be put on the whitelist.
I don't know what you mean by "My hosting provider works with those jerks at manitu". Does your hosting provider use them to block you? Or
does he
work with them to resolve the issue?
They do work with them, and they don't like manitu, either. Btw, I was told a few months ago that there's some fee involved for removing a mailhost.
selfip.biz
I don't see the relevance. You should provide the URL, so one could actually check the headers of the mail (it doesn't list the content) and decide if it could have been spam. If it indeed was spam (either by content or by definition) I don't see what's wrong with putting it on the list according to list policy.
Right, but given what whois reports, for all I know, it's somebody with a home business that can't/won't even afford their own static IP reporting this. This suggests that it could be one person getting a bunch of spam, and blocking everyone else by reporting it a few times.
selfip.biz is actually a domain they use for their spamtraps. So, this
Ok, thanks for that info. <snip>
The problem here is that Mark is using a shared hostmonster smtp server to relay outbound mail, and from time to time they relay spam and get blacklisted for it. We've experienced a similar thing from time to time where we have a server hosted with hostmonster that sends out notification emails which are relayed via shared hostmonster mail servers, and occasionally we get bounce notifications where hostmonster's outbound relays are blacklisted (I have mostly noticed them being blacklisted by SpamCop).
Perfect description.
If it's important I'd suggest not using shared resources for your outbound mail. If you use a dedicated server (with it's own IP) for outbound mail you will know it's clean and hopefully not get blacklisted. You get what you pay for.
Right, and since I'm NOT running a business - I broke down and got the domain when I was about to relocate for the THIRD TIME in < 10 years halfway across the US, so that I could tell everyone an email address that wouldn't change again. I dunno that they have a rate that includes a non-shared mailserver without going to business rates, 10-20 times what I'm paying now. <snip>
As you've found out, twice now, it's highly effective and gets people's
No, this is a dozen or two dozen times over the last four years, or more.
attention. As it's got your attention twice now, I'd suggest you either get used to it or move your outbound mail to a clean host. It's been going on long enough now that it's pretty obvious hostmonster don't care (if it's on my radar, it must have caught their attention - after all, it's their servers). They are happy to keep taking your money.
I assume you missed the last time I gave a long rant. Allow me to repeat the relevant part: about a dozen years ago, cogeco, in Canada, was blocking me from emailing an old friend, and even with him complaining, this went on and off and on till he simply stopped using them, and used his professional account.
The reason was that they were blocking roadrunner Chicago. Roadrunner, at the time, provided a major portion of the city of Chicago with 'Net access - that's hundreds of thousands of home and businesses, and they'd gobbled up most of the independent ISPs. We really didn't have much in the way of other options. What could anyone in the city do?
So instead of blocking domains, they block hosting providers' mailservers. 18 and 20 years ago, when there were lots of independent ISPs, it could make sense. In these days with most of them eaten, it does *not*.
mark
On 05/12/13 19:25, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Ned Slider wrote:
On 05/12/13 18:19, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Actually, Manitu, also known as NIXSpam, is quite a good list. I've been using only this one and Spamhaus for years. Very good FP:Spam ratio.
I, too, had an issue with the list lately and contacted the maintainer of the project who gave me a good explanation of why Facebook servers may be listed on it (they don't stop sending to discontinued users that have been bouncing for at least half a year).
If the mailserver of your provider sends spam it's absolutely fine to put it on the list. Or, in other words, that's what the list is for in the first place. If Hostmonster feels that there is only few spam running over their servers and they cannot get this down to zero (which is reasonable) then they can contact them and ask to be put on the whitelist.
I don't know what you mean by "My hosting provider works with those jerks at manitu". Does your hosting provider use them to block you? Or
does he
work with them to resolve the issue?
They do work with them, and they don't like manitu, either. Btw, I was told a few months ago that there's some fee involved for removing a mailhost.
selfip.biz
I don't see the relevance. You should provide the URL, so one could actually check the headers of the mail (it doesn't list the content) and decide if it could have been spam. If it indeed was spam (either by content or by definition) I don't see what's wrong with putting it on the list according to list policy.
Right, but given what whois reports, for all I know, it's somebody with a home business that can't/won't even afford their own static IP reporting this. This suggests that it could be one person getting a bunch of spam, and blocking everyone else by reporting it a few times.
selfip.biz is actually a domain they use for their spamtraps. So, this
Ok, thanks for that info.
<snip> > The problem here is that Mark is using a shared hostmonster smtp server > to relay outbound mail, and from time to time they relay spam and get > blacklisted for it. We've experienced a similar thing from time to time > where we have a server hosted with hostmonster that sends out > notification emails which are relayed via shared hostmonster mail > servers, and occasionally we get bounce notifications where > hostmonster's outbound relays are blacklisted (I have mostly noticed > them being blacklisted by SpamCop).
Perfect description.
If it's important I'd suggest not using shared resources for your outbound mail. If you use a dedicated server (with it's own IP) for outbound mail you will know it's clean and hopefully not get blacklisted. You get what you pay for.
Right, and since I'm NOT running a business - I broke down and got the domain when I was about to relocate for the THIRD TIME in < 10 years halfway across the US, so that I could tell everyone an email address that wouldn't change again. I dunno that they have a rate that includes a non-shared mailserver without going to business rates, 10-20 times what I'm paying now.
<snip> > As you've found out, twice now, it's highly effective and gets people's
No, this is a dozen or two dozen times over the last four years, or more.
attention. As it's got your attention twice now, I'd suggest you either get used to it or move your outbound mail to a clean host. It's been going on long enough now that it's pretty obvious hostmonster don't care (if it's on my radar, it must have caught their attention - after all, it's their servers). They are happy to keep taking your money.
I assume you missed the last time I gave a long rant. Allow me to repeat the relevant part: about a dozen years ago, cogeco, in Canada, was blocking me from emailing an old friend, and even with him complaining, this went on and off and on till he simply stopped using them, and used his professional account.
The reason was that they were blocking roadrunner Chicago. Roadrunner, at the time, provided a major portion of the city of Chicago with 'Net access
- that's hundreds of thousands of home and businesses, and they'd gobbled
up most of the independent ISPs. We really didn't have much in the way of other options. What could anyone in the city do?
So instead of blocking domains, they block hosting providers' mailservers. 18 and 20 years ago, when there were lots of independent ISPs, it could make sense. In these days with most of them eaten, it does *not*.
You are still completely missing the point. It doesn't matter what YOU think makes sense. It's totally irrelevant. I run a mail server. My server, my rules. If I want to use a black list that's my choice. You get blocked, tough, you are collateral damage. It doesn't matter what you think - it doesn't even matter if you are right (or wrong, or whatever).
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Ned Slider ned@unixmail.co.uk wrote:
You are still completely missing the point. It doesn't matter what YOU think makes sense.
No, I think that _is_ his point.
It's totally irrelevant. I run a mail server. My server, my rules.
Yes, running a mail server without caring if any mail is actually delivered seems somehow wrong.
Ned Slider wrote:
On 05/12/13 18:19, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Actually, Manitu, also known as NIXSpam, is quite a good list. I've been using only this one and Spamhaus for years. Very good FP:Spam ratio.
<snip>
Simple fact in the second decade of the 21st century is "their server, their rules". If someone wants to block you they can and they will. If your outbound server is spamming me I'd block you too. I don't care how many other people might be using it. It's not difficult to prevent outgoing spam, be responsible or be blocked. My server, my rules.
As you've found out, twice now, it's highly effective and gets people's attention. As it's got your attention twice now, I'd suggest you either get used to it or move your outbound mail to a clean host. It's been going on long enough now that it's pretty obvious hostmonster don't care (if it's on my radar, it must have caught their attention - after all, it's their servers). They are happy to keep taking your money.
And here's two thoughts that just struck me: first, they have no way to apply to be whitelisted.
And second, NIXSpam is a free service, right? Um, as someone said recently, you get what you pay for.
mark
On 05/12/13 19:37, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Ned Slider wrote:
On 05/12/13 18:19, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Actually, Manitu, also known as NIXSpam, is quite a good list. I've been using only this one and Spamhaus for years. Very good FP:Spam ratio.
<snip> > Simple fact in the second decade of the 21st century is "their server, > their rules". If someone wants to block you they can and they will. If > your outbound server is spamming me I'd block you too. I don't care how > many other people might be using it. It's not difficult to prevent > outgoing spam, be responsible or be blocked. My server, my rules. > > As you've found out, twice now, it's highly effective and gets people's > attention. As it's got your attention twice now, I'd suggest you either > get used to it or move your outbound mail to a clean host. It's been > going on long enough now that it's pretty obvious hostmonster don't care > (if it's on my radar, it must have caught their attention - after all, > it's their servers). They are happy to keep taking your money.
And here's two thoughts that just struck me: first, they have no way to apply to be whitelisted.
And second, NIXSpam is a free service, right? Um, as someone said recently, you get what you pay for.
mark
As Kai pointed out they are actually a very effective blacklist, irrespective of cost.
I don't understand why you persist with this. You say you've been hit with this a dozen or two dozen times now. You'd think by now you would have figured it out? You are collateral damage. No one cares. Hostmonster don't care - they are more than happy to keep taking your money each month. If they cared it wouldn't be happening time and time and time again. Manitu don't care - hostmonster spam their servers so get blacklisted. That's what they do.
YOU are the only person that cares because you are being directly impacted by it. If I were you I wouldn't stand for it. I'd go elsewhere. I probably would have moved after the second time it happened. If you are still with them after multiple instances you only have yourself to blame. Stop whinging to this list about it and do something about it - either move to another (clean) provider or provision yourself a mail server in clean IP space that you don't share with spammers.
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Ned Slider ned@unixmail.co.uk wrote:
You are collateral damage. No one cares.
It's not that no one else cares. It is just that everyone else has given up the fight and been forced to move to large mail hubs that can afford to keep themselves whitelisted. Marc is just more stubborn than most...
Ned Slider wrote:
On 05/12/13 19:37, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Ned Slider wrote:
On 05/12/13 18:19, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Actually, Manitu, also known as NIXSpam, is quite a good list. I've been using only this one and Spamhaus for years. Very good FP:Spam
ratio.
<snip> > Simple fact in the second decade of the 21st century is "their server, > their rules". If someone wants to block you they can and they will. If > your outbound server is spamming me I'd block you too. I don't care how > many other people might be using it. It's not difficult to prevent > outgoing spam, be responsible or be blocked. My server, my rules. > > As you've found out, twice now, it's highly effective and gets people's > attention. As it's got your attention twice now, I'd suggest you either > get used to it or move your outbound mail to a clean host. It's been > going on long enough now that it's pretty obvious hostmonster don't > care > (if it's on my radar, it must have caught their attention - after all, > it's their servers). They are happy to keep taking your money.
And here's two thoughts that just struck me: first, they have no way to apply to be whitelisted.
And second, NIXSpam is a free service, right? Um, as someone said recently, you get what you pay for.
As Kai pointed out they are actually a very effective blacklist, irrespective of cost.
I do *not* think it is. I strongly disagree. I've given two examples, years apart, of two seperate large ISPs being blocked.
I don't understand why you persist with this. You say you've been hit
Because I'd like to see the CentOS list use something other than NIXSpam.
with this a dozen or two dozen times now. You'd think by now you would have figured it out? You are collateral damage. No one cares. Hostmonster don't care - they are more than happy to keep taking your
Actually, they do. I've spoken to them, to tier 2 support, and it does matter to them, and they do keep working at getting unblocked. But as long as there's users who get their home or work PC infected, incidents will happen.
And I do *NOT* believe it's just me. It's obvious on the face of it that in both instances I've given examples of, that many other people who use the same services get hit. If I thought it was *only* me, I'd have been annoyed, but gone to another hosting provider. But a) are you going to claim that, no matter who I go to, unless I pay $60 or $100 or more a month, that it's not going to happen again with another provider? And b) why should I pay that much more for problems on one mailing list, of the half a dozen or more that I'm on?
money each month. If they cared it wouldn't be happening time and time and time again. Manitu don't care - hostmonster spam their servers so get blacklisted. That's what they do.
And the example I gave, from a dozen years ago, when there were more mailing lists - did the many residents of the city of Chicago "deserver" being blacklisted?
YOU are the only person that cares because you are being directly impacted by it. If I were you I wouldn't stand for it. I'd go elsewhere. I probably would have moved after the second time it happened. If you are still with them after multiple instances you only have yourself to blame. Stop whinging to this list about it and do something about it - either move to another (clean) provider or provision yourself a mail server in clean IP space that you don't share with spammers.
So, you're offering to pay the difference between the, what is it, $6/mo that I pay, and a commercial rate?
mark
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 2:10 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
So, you're offering to pay the difference between the, what is it, $6/mo that I pay, and a commercial rate?
I think you could afford what it would cost to originate your mail from a gmail or ymail account. Even though I agree with your sentiment that ordinary people should be able to control their own stuff, I don't think it is worth the battle.
M.roth@5-cent.us wrote on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 14:37:29 -0500:
And here's two thoughts that just struck me: first, they have no way to apply to be whitelisted.
I think there are ways, they do maintain a whitelist. Maybe Hostmonster is just not good enough to get on it. Did you consider that?
And second, NIXSpam is a free service, right? Um, as someone said recently, you get what you pay for.
If you pay you want to get whitelisted? Did you really want to say that?
Kai
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
M.roth@5-cent.us wrote on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 14:37:29 -0500:
And here's two thoughts that just struck me: first, they have no way to apply to be whitelisted.
I think there are ways, they do maintain a whitelist. Maybe Hostmonster is just not good enough to get on it. Did you consider that?
And second, NIXSpam is a free service, right? Um, as someone said recently, you get what you pay for.
If you pay you want to get whitelisted? Did you really want to say that?
Huh? No, the CentOS list is choosing to use NIXSpam. The list doesn't pay for it. On the other hand, NIXSpam offers no way to apply to be whitelisted by them, pay or not.
mark
The list "pays" very well. It's just that your hosting provider is regularly or irregularly on it. That's the only reason you think it doesn't "pay". Not a good reason. It "pays" for everybody else on this list except you. Consider that. It may even "pay" for you, just that you don't notice (less spam). You only notice if it blocks you.
Let's stop this discussion. We all know you don't like getting blocked. I won't follow up any longer.
Kai
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Ned Slider ned@unixmail.co.uk wrote:
It's not difficult to prevent outgoing spam,
The rest of the world begs to differ... If it were easy to stop spam there wouldn't be any spam.
As you've found out, twice now, it's highly effective and gets people's attention.
No, it is just annoying, and as you can see, the problem continues.
On 05/12/13 20:02, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Ned Slider ned@unixmail.co.uk wrote:
It's not difficult to prevent outgoing spam,
The rest of the world begs to differ... If it were easy to stop spam there wouldn't be any spam.
No, the rest of the world mostly just don't care. It's not difficult for an ISP/provider to block outgoing spam. Many ISPs manage to run clean operations and stay off blacklists. Do you think that's just luck?
As you've found out, twice now, it's highly effective and gets people's attention.
No, it is just annoying, and as you can see, the problem continues.
It might be annoying for him. It's not particularly annoying for me or the other millions of people who were being bombarded with the spam his servers are constantly spewing out.
The problem is his servers are spewing spam. That is the problem that continues and that is the problem that needs to be addressed. Mark's situation is merely the symptom.
Hostmonster obviously have no real interest in addressing it otherwise it wouldn't still be an ongoing issue. So as I said, he is irrelevant - he's just collateral damage in a much bigger battle.
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Ned Slider ned@unixmail.co.uk wrote:
It's not difficult to prevent outgoing spam,
The rest of the world begs to differ... If it were easy to stop spam there wouldn't be any spam.
No, the rest of the world mostly just don't care. It's not difficult for an ISP/provider to block outgoing spam. Many ISPs manage to run clean operations and stay off blacklists. Do you think that's just luck?
No, I think they block port 25. Of course you can stop spam if you stop all email. That doesn't really solve the problem for someone who wants to have their own domain. And regardless of whether there is any spam or not, anyone can claim there was to get someone they don't like on a blacklist.
Ned Slider wrote:
On 05/12/13 20:02, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Ned Slider ned@unixmail.co.uk wrote:
<snip>
No, the rest of the world mostly just don't care. It's not difficult for an ISP/provider to block outgoing spam. Many ISPs manage to run clean operations and stay off blacklists. Do you think that's just luck?
Really? Name three. <snip>
No, it is just annoying, and as you can see, the problem continues.
It might be annoying for him. It's not particularly annoying for me or the other millions of people who were being bombarded with the spam his servers are constantly spewing out.
The problem is his servers are spewing spam. That is the problem that continues and that is the problem that needs to be addressed. Mark's situation is merely the symptom.
Hostmonster obviously have no real interest in addressing it otherwise it wouldn't still be an ongoing issue. So as I said, he is irrelevant - he's just collateral damage in a much bigger battle.
Ok, you've made an assumption and an assertion based on that: you assert that hostmonster, with its millions of domains (I asked tech support, that's what they told me) is "spewing" out spam. Prove that assertion. Esp. since I get blocked, on and off, for a day or two, and then sometimes not for a week, and sometimes not for a month. My take, from this, is that it is *not* "spewing out spam", but rather that some sleazebag sets up shop, or someone gets infected, sends it out, they finally find it and shut them down.
So, justify your assertion with counter-evidence.
mark
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 03:30:11PM -0500, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
So, justify your assertion with counter-evidence.
Please do so in a venue that is relevant to this on-going pissing contest if you would be so kind. Thank you.
John
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:23 PM, John R. Dennison jrd@gerdesas.com wrote:
So, justify your assertion with counter-evidence.
Please do so in a venue that is relevant to this on-going pissing contest if you would be so kind. Thank you.
You mean a venue that chooses to use the specific service being discussed with the specific results being discussed? Hmmm...
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 03:26:45PM -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
You mean a venue that chooses to use the specific service being discussed with the specific results being discussed? Hmmm...
It stopped being that quite some time back. Like the last time this occured. Or the time before that. If there are issues like this that need to be addressed there is an established address that one should be using: $listname-owner@host.tld - it will get routed to the person that is the ultimate owner of the list; said list is available by looking at the bottom of the listinfo web page:
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Arguing about this type of subject on the list doesn't do anything to address the problem, if there is one to be addressed.
John
John R. Dennison wrote:
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 03:26:45PM -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
You mean a venue that chooses to use the specific service being discussed with the specific results being discussed? Hmmm...
It stopped being that quite some time back. Like the last time this occured. Or the time before that. If there are issues like this that need to be addressed there is an established address that one should be using: $listname-owner@host.tld - it will get routed to the person that is the ultimate owner of the list; said list is available by looking at the bottom of the listinfo web page:
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Arguing about this type of subject on the list doesn't do anything to address the problem, if there is one to be addressed.
I keep hoping, perhaps foolishly, that others who get hit with this will add their voice, and that the list might go to using some other source to block spam.
mrak
M.roth@5-cent.us wrote on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 16:47:37 -0500:
I keep hoping, perhaps foolishly, that others who get hit with this will add their voice, and that the list might go to using some other source to block spam.
Oh, yeah, until the day where that list adds Hostmonster as well and suddenly is the devil. Come on, don't you see that you are acting pretty irrational?
Kai
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
M.roth@5-cent.us wrote on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 16:47:37 -0500:
I keep hoping, perhaps foolishly, that others who get hit with this will add their voice, and that the list might go to using some other source to block spam.
Oh, yeah, until the day where that list adds Hostmonster as well and suddenly is the devil. Come on, don't you see that you are acting pretty irrational?
Me, irrational? At being annoyed by being blocked? By a "service" I've been annoyed at before, when I was using other ISPs?
And in one post, I asked those who assert hostmonster is evil to a) provide a basis for that assertion, *other* than my being occasionally blocked by NIXSpam, and b) to name a price-comparable hosting provider, in the US, that will never get me blocked, ever.
I'm still waiting on those responses.
In the meantime, a) no one ever responded to Nux!'s post about how they were badly hurt by NIXSpam, b) no one's even appeared to consider alternatives to NIXSpam - I've never run a hosting site, I've never had to deal with it all, but surely there are folks out there who *have* used other resources - surely NIXSpam isn't the only one that' free.
And c) rather than reasonable discussion, several folks, including you, are basically attacking me for being annoyed. My response is that this thread has become completely nonproductive, tedious, and only more annoyance, so I won't post any more to it. If someone has more to say to me, take it offlist - my email's public.
And unscrew you, Kai.
mark
On 05.12.2013 18:19, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Actually, Manitu, also known as NIXSpam, is quite a good list. I've been using only this one and Spamhaus for years. Very good FP:Spam ratio.
RBLs should at most be used in Spamassassin to increase the score, otherwise you risk losing legit email!
And it does suck to be on them, way too many people run way too many lists. I still have a /21 listed in SORBS because once upon a time it used to be part of an ISP's /18 dynamic range. Obviously I can't use those IPs for customers (hosting) since their emails will almost always get marked. Sorbs' support does not exist, of course. Thank fsck that was not our only range, we would've gone bankrupt.
Nux! wrote:
On 05.12.2013 18:19, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Actually, Manitu, also known as NIXSpam, is quite a good list. I've been using only this one and Spamhaus for years. Very good FP:Spam ratio.
RBLs should at most be used in Spamassassin to increase the score, otherwise you risk losing legit email!
And it does suck to be on them, way too many people run way too many lists. I still have a /21 listed in SORBS because once upon a time it used to be part of an ISP's /18 dynamic range. Obviously I can't use those IPs for customers (hosting) since their emails will almost always get marked. Sorbs' support does not exist, of course. Thank fsck that was not our only range, we would've gone bankrupt.
Hey, Nux!
I notice that those attacking me have walked around your comments without addressing them.
And then, as I think of it, I wonder just how big the false positive is for NIXSpam....
mark
On 05.12.2013 20:15, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Nux! wrote:
On 05.12.2013 18:19, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Actually, Manitu, also known as NIXSpam, is quite a good list. I've been using only this one and Spamhaus for years. Very good FP:Spam ratio.
RBLs should at most be used in Spamassassin to increase the score, otherwise you risk losing legit email!
And it does suck to be on them, way too many people run way too many lists. I still have a /21 listed in SORBS because once upon a time it used to be part of an ISP's /18 dynamic range. Obviously I can't use those IPs for customers (hosting) since their emails will almost always get marked. Sorbs' support does not exist, of course. Thank fsck that was not our only range, we would've gone bankrupt.
Hey, Nux!
I notice that those attacking me have walked around your comments without addressing them.
And then, as I think of it, I wonder just how big the false positive is for NIXSpam....
mark
Different people, different opinions, different point of views. For some it's a blessing, for some it's a bloody curse. I'd break the legs of that Sorbs person, but someone else might choose to kiss them instead, what can you do. We're ready to go to war for a frickin RBL. :-)
For what it's worth, I'm FOR ditching any RBLs except maybe Spamhaus and Spamcop who are very quick to delist addresses. I'd also go at the list admin and ask to have your email address whitelisted.
If you still get nowhere with this I can help you host your email, just let me know.
-
John R. Dennison -
Kai Schaetzl -
Les Mikesell -
m.roth＠5-cent.us -
Ned Slider -
Nux!