On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 02:23:11AM +1000, Jason Lim wrote: > > says, and I quote, "Zentek (Jason Lim) is a spam-house, Iadvantage > > tolerates spammers. > > Thats right... because I'm one of the first people to complain about > this and probably the most vocal (and I'll continue to do so until > others see the truth). Maybe the other people in HK don't have good > enough English to argue the support themselves, but I do, and they > can't just go around bashing HK all they want without someone putting > up a fight.
if you really cared about the issue, you'd be a lot more productive if you spent your energies explaining to chinese-speaking sysadmins what the spam problem is, why they've been black-listed and what they can do to get off the list. that would be far more effective than whining on english-speaking mailing lists and newsgroups. given the SPEWS listing, though, it looks like you're possibly a spammer or spamhaus rather than just an end-user suffering collateral damage. i hope that's not the case. > BTW, I'd be very happy if iAdvantage was owned by me... it being a > multimillion dollar, publically listed corporation and all. I'm > actually kind of flattered that SPEWS thinks I'm running the show > there. > > We're one of their customers using their bandwidth... they are one of > the highest performance bandwidth facilities in HK which is why we use > them for our bandwidth. whether you like it or not, anyone can block email on their own servers using whatever criteria they choose. you do NOT have a right to have your mail accepted. nobody does. that choice rests with the recipient server. you have two choices: 1. explain to your ISP why they shouldn't be supporting spammers and get them to enforce an anti-spam policy. 2. move to an ISP which doesn't support spammers. if enough people did this and told them why, your current ISP might finally acquire a clue and change their ways. i recommend trying option 1 first and then, if that fails, option 2. > iAdvantage provides bandwidth to many hundreds of large corporations > in HK... overall i'd say many thousands of websites are hosted there > (mostly Chinese probably). So with one fell swoop all these sites can > no longer send email properly. Can we say collateral damage to the > max? so what? telstra and ozemail (the latter is owned by uunet) here in australia host thousands of legitimate businesses, and actually show some signs of pursuing an anti-spam policy. they still get black-listed (and rightly so) when they're caught running open relays or refuse to terminate a spammer's account. the truth is that it is ONLY the fact that various RBLs will list them that has forced them to have an anti-spam policy and actually enforce it. unless it affects their bottom-line (i.e. when the costs of supporting spam are greater than the profits from supporting spam), they don't care and they're not going to do anything about it. craig -- craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fabricati Diem, PVNC. -- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch
