Hi, On Tue, 7 May 2002, Craig Sanders wrote: > On Tue, May 07, 2002 at 10:25:12AM +0200, Emile van Bergen wrote: > > On Tue, 7 May 2002, Craig Sanders wrote: > > > no, it's not relative. there is an absolute, black-and-white > > > criteria which you are too stupid to see: if a site is part of the > > > spam problem then it should be black-listed. if it is not part of > > > the problem then it shouldn't be listed. > > > > Pray tell then, *when* is a site part of the spam problem? > > > > Please share your infallible, absolute, black-and-white criteria for > > that, because obviously we were missing it all along. > > yes, you have missed it because i've mentioned it several times in this > thread. here it is spelt out so that even you or jason should be able > to understand it: > > 1. is the site an open relay?
That is a good one, but doesn't catch all cases. You recognise that too: > 2. is the site a spam source? That's my point. *Where* is your threshold? *When* do you, with absolute certainty, conclude that a site is a spam source? Cheers, Emile. -- E-Advies / Emile van Bergen | [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel. +31 (0)70 3906153 | http://www.e-advies.info -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
