On Thursday, August 11, 2011 11:28 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> That conversation would make sense if there were any spam blockers that
>>> cared about the collateral damage to unrelated hosts that happen to be
>>
>> So, in your experience, there aren't *any*, they all block an entire range?
>>
>>
On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 19:13 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> considering that it began as a rant which was inappropriately targeted,
> I would say that it was out of hand when it began.
Lets not prolong it then ;-)
--
With best regards,
Paul.
England,
EU.
___
On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 13:41 -0400, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Thursday, August 11, 2011 05:31:21 PM Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> > *You* confused things. You mixed ISPs and hosting. You can't.
>
> An Internet Service Provider is an Internet Service Provider regardless of
> the type, bandwidth, or technolog
On Thursday, August 11, 2011 05:31:21 PM Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> *You* confused things. You mixed ISPs and hosting. You can't.
An Internet Service Provider is an Internet Service Provider regardless of the
type, bandwidth, or technology of the pipe provided, regardless of the number
of IP address
On 8/11/2011 4:56 PM, Keith Roberts wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Aug 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> *snip*
>
>> Many/most ISP's provide an upstream SMTP relay as part of
>> the service. If they do, configure it as your smart_host
>> and it will fix the problem. If they don't, find some
>> other relay service
On Thu, 11 Aug 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
*snip*
> Many/most ISP's provide an upstream SMTP relay as part of
> the service. If they do, configure it as your smart_host
> and it will fix the problem. If they don't, find some
> other relay service.
Is this any good?
http://www.noreply.org/echol
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:03:45 -0400:
> I'm sorry if I've confused you.
*You* confused things. You mixed ISPs and hosting. You can't. You were
talking largely about ISPs and how their customers get blocked from
sending mail directly and how they don't have a clue. I was try
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:07:49 -0400:
> No. I've been blocked for a period ranging from hours to several days, and
> kept getting myself unbanned, a number of times in the last couple of
> years.
I see. So you got what you paid for.
Kai
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 08:53:02PM +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Is it really the first time that you hear about the concept of RBLs? They
> have been around for years and have proven to be one of the most effective
> ways to combat spam, still.
I'll love to see how they handle IPv6 once machines
On 8/11/2011 1:35 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
>> Be pragmatic. Accept partial defeat. Get an alternative email
>> arrangement and you may become more happier.
>
> NO. I WILL *NOT* allow the goddamned spammers to block me from the 'Net,
> and I'm *not* willing to have them cost me my email, and go
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> m.r...@5-cent.us wrote on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:46:22 -0400:
>
>> I'm sorry, nobody seems to get what I've been saying: I haven't been on
>> roadrunner for two years. I'm sending this email via bluehost, my
>> current
>> hosting provider.
>
> Ok, so you use Bluehost and one of t
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> m.r...@5-cent.us wrote on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 14:12:03 -0400:
>
>> I'm not sure who you're answering or agreeing with, but my point is
>> still that 90% of everybody blocked has no clue whatever about what
>> to do about it, and esp. the people with infected systems. A standard
>
Josh Miller wrote:
> On 08/11/2011 11:12 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> Josh Miller wrote:
>>> In fact, that is one of the single most effective mechanisms used to
>>> combat spam, in my experience and will cut down the amount accepted at
>>> the gateway(s) by up to 95%.
>>
>> I'm not sure who you'
On 8/11/2011 1:16 PM, Always Learning wrote:
>
>> Let me know when they get back to you. I'll look for your email sometime
>> around the time when you move and change providers.
>
> You can not change the world on your own, even a little bit, without
> some help. Help from mass 'Internet connection
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:46:22 -0400:
> I'm sorry, nobody seems to get what I've been saying: I haven't been on
> roadrunner for two years. I'm sending this email via bluehost, my current
> hosting provider.
Ok, so you use Bluehost and one of their mailservers got on the list
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 14:12:03 -0400:
> I'm not sure who you're answering or agreeing with, but my point is still
> that 90% of everybody blocked has no clue whatever about what to do about
> it, and esp. the people with infected systems. A standard channel *to* an
> ISP for t
On Aug 11, 2011, at 10:56 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Sorry, mouse ran away there with the last post with no comments.
>
> Craig White wrote:
>> On Aug 11, 2011, at 4:51 AM, mark wrote:
>>> Always Learning wrote:
On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 21:36 -0500, John R. Dennison wrote:
>
>>> You don't
Always Learning wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 13:56 -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> Craig White wrote:
>
>> And that's *EXACTLY* what I'm saying is the wrong thing to do. Dunno
>> where you live, but go ahead, for whoever provides 'Net access to your
>> home: call them up, or email them, and tel
On 08/11/2011 11:12 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Josh Miller wrote:
>> In fact, that is one of the single most effective mechanisms used to
>> combat spam, in my experience and will cut down the amount accepted at
>> the gateway(s) by up to 95%.
>
> I'm not sure who you're answering or agreeing wi
On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 13:56 -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Craig White wrote:
> > If an RBL has designated a particular SMTP server or range of SMTP servers
> > as a source for spam then the solution lies with those that own the SMTP
> > servers to satisfy the RBL and get the blocks removed.
>
Josh Miller wrote:
> On 08/11/2011 10:56 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> Craig White wrote:
>>> On Aug 11, 2011, at 4:51 AM, mark wrote:
Always Learning wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 21:36 -0500, John R. Dennison wrote:
>>
You don't seem to understand the issue. My hosting provider h
On 08/11/2011 10:56 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Craig White wrote:
>> On Aug 11, 2011, at 4:51 AM, mark wrote:
>>> Always Learning wrote:
On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 21:36 -0500, John R. Dennison wrote:
>
>>> You don't seem to understand the issue. My hosting provider has
>>> literally hundreds o
Sorry, mouse ran away there with the last post with no comments.
Craig White wrote:
> On Aug 11, 2011, at 4:51 AM, mark wrote:
>> Always Learning wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 21:36 -0500, John R. Dennison wrote:
>> You don't seem to understand the issue. My hosting provider has
>> literally h
Craig White wrote:
>
> On Aug 11, 2011, at 4:51 AM, mark wrote:
>
>> Always Learning wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 21:36 -0500, John R. Dennison wrote:
Waste of time and resources. Learn how to properly handle email and
none of this nonsense is necessary.
>>>
>>> Properly handling ema
On Aug 11, 2011, at 4:51 AM, mark wrote:
> Always Learning wrote:
>> On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 21:36 -0500, John R. Dennison wrote:
>>> Waste of time and resources. Learn how to properly handle email and
>>> none of this nonsense is necessary.
>>
>> Properly handling emails means, to me, not being
On 8/11/2011 10:02 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
>> So move them to gmail. Price is right. End of problem. If you don't
>
> No. Not ever. I have no intention of using a service that will have
> *years*, at least, of backups of all my mail, including stuff that was
> hypothetically d/l and *delete
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 11:02 AM, wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On 8/11/2011 8:09 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
>>> 1. I'm not going to join this list, or any other, from multiple email
>>> accounts
>>
>> So move them to gmail. Price is right. End of problem. If you don't
>
> No. Not ever. I
On 8/11/2011 9:58 AM, Scott Robbins wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 09:52:47AM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On 8/11/2011 8:09 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>>
>>
>> So move them to gmail. Price is right. End of problem.
>
>
>
>
> If you don't
>> like their browser interface, use pop/imap and auth
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 8/11/2011 8:09 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> 1. I'm not going to join this list, or any other, from multiple email
>> accounts
>
> So move them to gmail. Price is right. End of problem. If you don't
No. Not ever. I have no intention of using a service that will have
*y
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 09:52:47AM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 8/11/2011 8:09 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> >
>
> So move them to gmail. Price is right. End of problem.
If you don't
> like their browser interface, use pop/imap and authenticated smtp.
Did gmail ever fix their "featur
On 8/11/2011 8:09 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
>> Obviously I don't know your computer situation. It seems your present
>> 'service' is not always reliable, so is there anything we can do to help
>> you devise an alternative plan ?
>
> No, you still don't understand.
How much sympathy do you expe
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> we block with manitu = nixspam as our primary RBL (followed by Spamhaus).
> Results are excellent. Their blocking is very reasonable. It's also
> possible to ask for inclusion in the whitelist. Obviously your great ISP
> Roadrunner isn't interested in inclusion or is sending o
On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 06:52 +0100, Keith Roberts wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Aug 2011, Always Learning wrote:
>
> > Why not run your own mail server ? I use Exim (a Sendmail replacement)
> > on several servers. I refuse incoming mails where the sender's HELO /
> > EHLO does not match the sender's IP hos
On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 09:09 -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> The real problem is manitou.net, and their "algorythm". 15 years ago, it
> might have been reasonable to track mailhosts, and block all mail coming
> from that host. For the last 10 years, at least, it's *wrong*. Even the
> best of 'Net
we block with manitu = nixspam as our primary RBL (followed by Spamhaus).
Results are excellent. Their blocking is very reasonable. It's also
possible to ask for inclusion in the whitelist. Obviously your great ISP
Roadrunner isn't interested in inclusion or is sending out so many spam
that the
Always Learning wrote:
>
> Hi Mark,
>
>> You don't seem to understand the issue. My hosting provider has
>> literally hundreds of thousands of domains. The email gets funneled for
>> all, I assume, except those paying for co-location, through their
>> heavy-duty mailhost. manitu sees spam coming fr
Hi Mark,
> > Why not run your own mail server ? I use Exim (a Sendmail replacement)
> Because I'm not going to pay for colocation, or whatever. This is my
> personal domain, etc, and I'm paying about $6US for it a month. I'm not
> running a business, and so don't want to pay $$$ to Verizon for
Hi Mark,
> You don't seem to understand the issue. My hosting provider has
> literally hundreds of thousands of domains. The email gets funneled for
> all, I assume, except those paying for co-location, through their
> heavy-duty mailhost. manitu sees spam coming from that mailhost, and
> blo
Always Learning wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 21:36 -0500, John R. Dennison wrote:
>> Waste of time and resources. Learn how to properly handle email and
>> none of this nonsense is necessary.
>
> Properly handling emails means, to me, not being too reliant on others
> whose faults and omissions
Paul,
Always Learning wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 17:10 -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
>> listadmin,
>>
>>Can you PLEASE, PLEASE find *any* other blacklist than manitu? This
>> asshole's method was ok a dozen years ago; these days, with hosting sites
>> hosting tens or hundreds of thousa
On Thu, 11 Aug 2011, Always Learning wrote:
snip
> Why not run your own mail server ? I use Exim (a Sendmail replacement)
> on several servers. I refuse incoming mails where the sender's HELO /
> EHLO does not match the sender's IP host name, because that - for me -
> eliminates 90% or more of sp
On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 21:36 -0500, John R. Dennison wrote:
> Waste of time and resources. Learn how to properly handle email and
> none of this nonsense is necessary.
Properly handling emails means, to me, not being too reliant on others
whose faults and omissions could impair your ability to se
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 03:08:46AM +0100, Always Learning wrote:
>
> Why not run your own mail server ? I use Exim (a Sendmail replacement)
> on several servers. I refuse incoming mails where the sender's HELO /
> EHLO does not match the sender's IP host name, because that - for me -
> eliminates
On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 17:10 -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> listadmin,
>
>Can you PLEASE, PLEASE find *any* other blacklist than manitu? This
> asshole's method was ok a dozen years ago; these days, with hosting sites
> hosting tens or hundreds of thousands of domains, with too many running
44 matches
Mail list logo
