John R. Dennison wrote: > On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:04:49PM -0400, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >> >> b) What assurance do I have that whoever I chose won't wind up with the >> same problem, given that, as I mentioned, a dozen years ago, they were >> blocking a good part of the city of Chicago? > > Umm, that's actually hardly true considering the number of providers in > Chicago. > Around the turn of the decade, there were *NOT*. For example, my nice ISP got eaten by 21st Century, which got eaten by rcn, which I think was either a branch, or became part of Time-Warner, and that's just my experience. And for other than dial-up, there WERE NO OTHER cable/Internet providers in large swaths of the city. <snip> > Hell Mark... _I_ will be happy to relay outbound for you, no charge, for > as long as you want it. That was unexpected, and thank you. I may take you up on that. At least this time, I could remove myself, as opposed to the times when they complain that "too many spams", and I have to wait for hostmonster to get them off their case. > > Should things be the way they are? No, probably not. Should you be > ignored by TPTB with regards to this? No, probably not. Is anything > likely to change? No, likely not. It is what it is, for better or > worse. As I said, ideal case is for IX to actually respond, and change their methods; second best would be for the listowner to choose some other method of blocking spam - I dunno, a captcha when signing up for the list? > > The offer is legit. If you want to take me up on it and we can get this > fixed for you, awesome. If not, I urge you to take matters into your > own hands and implement a solution to address this recurring problem. Again, thank you. You're a scholar... <g> mark, not a gentleman, neither by breeding, nor Act of Congress