On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:14:38 +0200 Sarocet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dennis Peterson wrote: > > I think he's suggesting that he'd prefer you not mail him because of > > your idiot policy on outgoing virus scanning. I agree with him. I'm sure > > I'm not the only one who would blacklist you right now because of your > > policy if we knew your outgoing smtp IP. > > > Scanning outgoing email is not something i think such useful and it's a > nuisance for its users, > but how does it deserve for a smtp ban? > > > PS: Note that he didn't explicitely said he was scanning outgoing mail. It's unfortunate that this thread moved quickly to such a heat that the fellow who intitiated it with a basic query decided to quit this list. I'm in agreement with the other pros who voiced their opinion regarding enforcement of sensible procedures. However the better approach with this individual may have been to ask more details regarding his setup and present a reasoned alternative to his approach for his consideration -- not threaten him with a ban. My own approach would have been to explain why a ban would be justified should a workable alternative not be employed. The lost opportunity here was to explain why any person using an unprotected system is a risk to themselves and others. There are a lot more people using systems in all kinds of ways whom didn't acquire the knowledge base or skill set of the pros here and elsewhere. This venue doesn't have to be a school; it should however be a resource where persons of any skill level may approach and learn something useful without risk of being torched, scalded or otherwise impugned. Tolerance with reasoned restraint are not weaknesses; it is the first requirement for pros to become better teachers and better listeners.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
