Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 16:17:02 CDT, trinity.edu's mailer, *not* "Brian R. Watters" said: > Sender: brwatt...@absfoc.com > Subject: Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact > Message-Id: <1d95a7a9-8340-45e7-b803-03f1827326e1@brw-abs-office> > Recipient: ge...@trinity

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

Sender: brwatt...@absfoc.com Subject: Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact Message-Id: <1d95a7a9-8340-45e7-b803-03f1827326e1@brw-abs-office> Recipient: ge...@trinity.edu.test-google-a.com, Forwarded: gerno.rein...@trinity.edu --- Begin Message --- Thanks .. their attempts to reach us are blocked v

Re: SORBS contact

Sender: brwatt...@absfoc.com Subject: Re: SORBS contact Message-Id: <8beae4f1-acd0-4408-9f75-264aff04d788@brw-abs-office> Recipient: ge...@trinity.edu.test-google-a.com, Forwarded: gerno.rein...@trinity.edu --- Begin Message --- Nope .. just like pain and suffering :( - Original M

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 18:36:22 EDT, William Herrin said: > On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 2:32 PM, wrote: > >That sort of shoots your "If Woody had gone straight to the > >SPF record, none of this would have happened" claim. > > My WHAT claim? What you said: > 2. I assume the subscription request came

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 2:32 PM, wrote: >That sort of shoots your "If Woody had gone straight to the >SPF record, none of this would have happened" claim. My WHAT claim? You asked if I wanted mailing list confirmation requests that arrive at my mail server to have a non-null return path. My answ

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 15:18:17 EDT, William Herrin said: > 2. I assume the subscription request came from a web page because if > it was from an email request you received then you ignored my SPF > records when generating the confirmation request. That was OK in 2001 > but in 2011 you ought not be d

RE: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

> A valid and well put argument. I don't know what we do with stuff to > webmaster@ however I do know that it is possible that messages to it > will go into the spamtrap system. (the spamtrap system has multiple > entry points, and a mail going in does not guarentee a listing, but it > is likely,

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

Jimmy Hess wrote: > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Michelle Sullivan > wrote: > > Rich Kulawiec wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 01:45:52AM -0400, Dan Collins wrote: > [snip] > > later in the document, Webmaster@ is not in the required list. >

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On 7/30/2011 2:33 PM, Michelle Sullivan wrote: Ken Chase wrote: On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 02:57:12PM +0200, Michelle Sullivan said: >Ok I'll accept that reference..I must admit I didn't know that RFC/STD >existed so I learnt something today. ;-) That's pretty rich. You enforce people to a

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > Rich Kulawiec wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 01:45:52AM -0400, Dan Collins wrote: > [snip] > later in the document, Webmaster@ is not in the required list. As per > my previous email, the webservers (all of them) report another em

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

Ken Chase wrote: > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 02:57:12PM +0200, Michelle Sullivan said: > > >Ok I'll accept that reference..I must admit I didn't know that RFC/STD > >existed so I learnt something today. ;-) > > That's pretty rich. > > You enforce people to adopt standards that are part of propose

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:12 AM, wrote: > Hint:  If somebody forges a subscription request from 'nosuchu...@herrin.us', > do you want the resulting "Somebody has requested this email address to be > added to the foobar-l list, please click or reply within 48 hours to confirm" > mail to show up w

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 09:46:13 EDT, William Herrin said: > Point taken. Bounce reports, temporary failure reports and successful > delivery reports. Nevertheless, it still isn't for "other > programmatically generated mail." In fact, the next paragraph in RFC > 5321 4.5.5 says: > > "All other types

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 02:57:12PM +0200, Michelle Sullivan said: >Ok I'll accept that reference..I must admit I didn't know that RFC/STD >existed so I learnt something today. ;-) That's pretty rich. You enforce people to adopt standards that are part of proposed RFC's, not official by any s

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 23:52:50 +0200, Michelle Sullivan said: > reference to bounce messages and mailing lists.) The registration email > has a null return path because people will put in forged addresses and > we don't want them to do that in the first place, and if they do it, we > certainly don'

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 11:22 AM, wrote: > On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:48:44 EDT, William Herrin said: >> Correction: It's a standard way to denote that "this mail is a bounce >> report." > > It's *not* just "bounce reports" (in particular, DSNs and MDNs are not > non-delivery (bounce) messages in the

Re: SORBS contact

Paul Graydon wrote: > It's pretty much customer service 101 to ensure that you keep your > communications as neutral and polite as possible, regardless of how > frustrated or vilified you feel by the person you're supporting, and > regardless of how tired you are of accusatory tickets. Being snark

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

Rich Kulawiec wrote: > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 01:45:52AM -0400, Dan Collins wrote: > >> On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Michelle Sullivan >> wrote: >> >>> Emailing random non-existent email addresses (such as >>> webmas...@sorbs.net) will earn you a listing... >>> >> webmaster@*

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

Dan Collins wrote: > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > >> Emailing random non-existent email addresses (such as >> webmas...@sorbs.net) will earn you a listing... >> > > webmaster@* isn't "random", it's a fairly standard way to reach the > administrator of a serv

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 01:45:52AM -0400, Dan Collins wrote: > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > > Emailing random non-existent email addresses (such as > > webmas...@sorbs.net) will earn you a listing... > > webmaster@* isn't "random", it's a fairly standard way to rea

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > Emailing random non-existent email addresses (such as > webmas...@sorbs.net) will earn you a listing... webmaster@* isn't "random", it's a fairly standard way to reach the administrator of a service. A failure to support that on your pa

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

Landon Stewart wrote: > On 28 July 2011 14:16, Brian R. Watters wrote: > > >> Thanks .. their attempts to reach us are blocked via our Barrcacuda's due >> to the fact that they are sending with a blank FROM: and as such Barracuda >> thinks its SPAM .. just to darn funny .. I have whitelisted th

Re: SORBS contact

Nick Hilliard wrote: Email is such a lousy medium for this. We're all much more decent people in person than over snarky emails. Speak for yourself!

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On 28 July 2011 14:16, Brian R. Watters wrote: > Thanks .. their attempts to reach us are blocked via our Barrcacuda's due > to the fact that they are sending with a blank FROM: and as such Barracuda > thinks its SPAM .. just to darn funny .. I have whitelisted their domain so > on my fourth atte

Re: SORBS contact

On 07/29/2011 12:24 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote: On 29/07/2011 22:55, Michelle Sullivan wrote: Friendly or non friendly response is usually gaugable in advance by the tone of the initial email. Which is usually gaugeable in advance by the tone of the customer complaints that precipitated contact wi

Re: SORBS contact

On 29/07/2011 22:55, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > Friendly or non friendly response is usually gaugable in advance by the > tone of the initial email. Which is usually gaugeable in advance by the tone of the customer complaints that precipitated contact with SORBS in the first place. Email is such

Re: SORBS contact

William Pitcock wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:31:13 -0700 (PDT) > "Brian R. Watters" wrote: > > >> We are looking for a SORBS contact as their web site and registration >> process is less than friendly if somehow you get listed by them. >> > &

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

William Herrin wrote: > On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 2:46 AM, wrote: > >> And you might want to fix it, since your users will never get a bounce notice >> from any RFC-compliant mailer - even if they *wanted* to know that their mail >> wasn't delivered. <> is the RFC-standard way to denote "this m

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:48:44 EDT, William Herrin said: > Correction: It's a standard way to denote that "this mail is a bounce > report." Correction to your correction: What the RFC actually says: 4.5.5. Messages with a Null Reverse-Path There are several types of notification messages tha

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 2:46 AM, wrote: > And you might want to fix it, since your users will never get a bounce notice > from any RFC-compliant mailer - even if they *wanted* to know that their mail > wasn't delivered.  <> is the RFC-standard way to denote "this mail is a bounce > report or othe

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 14:16:23 PDT, "Brian R. Watters" said: > Thanks .. their attempts to reach us are blocked via our Barrcacuda's due to > the fact that they are sending with a blank FROM: and as such Barracuda thinks > its SPAM Please clarify. Are they sending MAIL FROM:(syntactically

Re: SORBS contact

He's the most interesting man in the world...SORBS is on HIS list and can't get off. -- -Barry Shein The World | b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD| Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada Software Tool & Die| Publ

Re: SORBS contact

Nope .. just like pain and suffering :( - Original Message - From: "Valdis Kletnieks" To: "Brian R. Watters" Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 12:44:29 PM Subject: Re: SORBS contact On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:31:13 PDT, "Brian R. Watters&quo

Re: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact

; , nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 12:47:56 PM Subject: [BULK] Re: SORBS contact You want to speak to SORBS? Good luck with that. Unless you are Chuck Norris; Chuck Norris can speak with SORBS anytime he wants :) On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 3:50 PM, William Pitcock < neno...@system

Re: SORBS contact

; Chuck Norris can speak with SORBS anytime he wants :) > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 3:50 PM, William Pitcock > wrote: > > > On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:31:13 -0700 (PDT) > > "Brian R. Watters" wrote: > > > > > We are looking for a SORBS contact as t

Re: SORBS contact

You want to speak to SORBS? Good luck with that. Unless you are Chuck Norris; Chuck Norris can speak with SORBS anytime he wants :) On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 3:50 PM, William Pitcock wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:31:13 -0700 (PDT) > "Brian R. Watters" wrote: > > > W

Re: SORBS contact

On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:31:13 -0700 (PDT) "Brian R. Watters" wrote: > We are looking for a SORBS contact as their web site and registration > process is less than friendly if somehow you get listed by them. As I recall it, you can manually create an account on their request-trac

Re: SORBS contact

On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:31:13 PDT, "Brian R. Watters" said: > We are looking for a SORBS contact as their web site and registration process > is less than friendly if somehow you get listed by them. You're new here, aren't you? :) (Sorry, couldn't resist. Previ

Re: SORBS contact?

mailop list? I run a dnsbl myself (dronebl to be exact), call me dumb or whatever, but never heard about that list. In fact, I am also working on granting AS admins to be able to list entries in their ranges etc, so if you are listed in whois as administrator of an AS and you want access to listing

Re: SORBS contact?

For future reference: you're much more likely to elicit a useful response by using the "mailop" list, since you'll be addressing a mixed audience of mail system operators, DNSBL operators, software authors, etc., all of whom are focused on mail and not network operations. ---rsk

Re: SORBS contact?

On Mar 22, 2011, at 7:08 PM, Mike wrote: > On 03/22/2011 03:58 PM, Paul Graydon wrote: >> On 03/22/2011 12:24 PM, Franck Martin wrote: >>> +1 >>> >>> They know the challenges, aware of the issues and I have seen some >>> progress. >> >> I'm glad to hear that, one less extortion racket on the 'n

Re: SORBS contact?

On 03/22/2011 03:58 PM, Paul Graydon wrote: On 03/22/2011 12:24 PM, Franck Martin wrote: +1 They know the challenges, aware of the issues and I have seen some progress. I'm glad to hear that, one less extortion racket on the 'net is no bad thing. They might do better by rebranding though. SOR

Re: SORBS contact?

f negative karma for them to get past. - Original Message - From: "Steve Atkins" To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, 23 March, 2011 9:56:20 AM Subject: Re: SORBS contact? On Mar 22, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Mike wrote: On 03/22/2011 12:14 PM, Paul Graydon wrote: On 03/22/2011

Re: SORBS contact?

+1 They know the challenges, aware of the issues and I have seen some progress. - Original Message - From: "Steve Atkins" To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, 23 March, 2011 9:56:20 AM Subject: Re: SORBS contact? On Mar 22, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Mike wrote: > On 03/22/

Re: SORBS contact?

On Mar 22, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Mike wrote: > On 03/22/2011 12:14 PM, Paul Graydon wrote: >> On 03/22/2011 09:07 AM, Chris Conn wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> Thank you to all that answered, all helpful info. Surprisingly minutes >>> after my Nanog post, a couple of my tickets saw action and the /24 wa

Re: SORBS contact?

On 03/22/2011 12:14 PM, Paul Graydon wrote: On 03/22/2011 09:07 AM, Chris Conn wrote: Hello, Thank you to all that answered, all helpful info. Surprisingly minutes after my Nanog post, a couple of my tickets saw action and the /24 was finally removed a short while later. Thanks again, Chris

Re: SORBS contact?

On 03/22/2011 09:07 AM, Chris Conn wrote: Hello, Thank you to all that answered, all helpful info. Surprisingly minutes after my Nanog post, a couple of my tickets saw action and the /24 was finally removed a short while later. Thanks again, Chris Woah... *collapses on the floor in shock*

Re: SORBS contact?

Hello, Thank you to all that answered, all helpful info. Surprisingly minutes after my Nanog post, a couple of my tickets saw action and the /24 was finally removed a short while later. Thanks again, Chris

Re: SORBS contact?

On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 04:31:21PM -0400, TR Shaw said: >One might wonder about the quality of the mail admins that rely on SORBS > >You might try http://www.au.sorbs.net/cgi-bin/support > One might also do other things that are to no avail, one of such things is to read this and rea

Re: SORBS contact?

On Mar 21, 2011, at 4:18 PM, Chris Conn wrote: > Hello, > > We have opened a number of tickets in the SORBS DUHL system to notify them of > the use of a former dialup /24 for static assignments to no avail. Anyone > from SORBS reading this? > > Thank you, > > Chris Conn > B2B2C.ca > One m

SORBS contact?

Hello, We have opened a number of tickets in the SORBS DUHL system to notify them of the use of a former dialup /24 for static assignments to no avail. Anyone from SORBS reading this? Thank you, Chris Conn B2B2C.ca

SORBS contact

Hello, I did try to reach someone at SORBS using their contact forms on the website. Somehow no action was taken and I also didn't get a response. Could someone from SORBS contact me? I need an issue to be resolved. With kind regards, Mark Scholten SinnerG BV

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Robert Bonomi wrote: [ clip ] > > > Lastly, I'm going to suggest that this is drifting rather afar OT from > the charter of the group, and suggest that the MLM may want to put the > kibosh on this thread. > > > That's exactly what happened the last time we discus

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

> From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" > Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 17:58:35 -0400 > > On Jul 14, 2009, at 5:47 PM, Mark Smith wrote: > > On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:34:18 -0500 > > William Pitcock wrote: > > On Sat, 2009-07-11 at 11:11 -0600, Brielle Bruns wrote: > >>> On 7/11/09 11:05 AM, Ronald Cotoni wrote: > >

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Wed, 15 Jul 2009, Mark Smith wrote: Yes, they are really bad. It is actually quite silly that a blacklisting service is that slow on responding to problems. Also, I believe SORBS are the ones that require a donation to get out if A 'required donation' sounds like a ransom to me. AFAIK

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Jul 14, 2009, at 5:47 PM, Mark Smith wrote: On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:34:18 -0500 William Pitcock wrote: On Sat, 2009-07-11 at 11:11 -0600, Brielle Bruns wrote: On 7/11/09 11:05 AM, Ronald Cotoni wrote: Yes, they are really bad. It is actually quite silly that a blacklisting service is that

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:34:18 -0500 William Pitcock wrote: > On Sat, 2009-07-11 at 11:11 -0600, Brielle Bruns wrote: > > On 7/11/09 11:05 AM, Ronald Cotoni wrote: > > > Yes, they are really bad. It is actually quite silly that a blacklisting > > > service is that slow on responding to problems. >

Re: Please do not CC NANOG when e-mailing Dean Anderson [was: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?]

How about, "Don't reply to Dean Anderson". :-) On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > [SNIP] > > Everyone, > > Please do not CC nanog@nanog.org when replying to one of Dean Anderson's > ... uh ... missives[*]. We do not see the original, so by replying and > CC'ing the li

Please do not CC NANOG when e-mailing Dean Anderson [was: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?]

[SNIP] Everyone, Please do not CC nanog@nanog.org when replying to one of Dean Anderson's ... uh ... missives[*]. We do not see the original, so by replying and CC'ing the list, you are helping him get his ... er ... message[*] to a wider audience. And if you have actually read any of

RE: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

>People bitch and whine about free services more than when they actually >pay for something. Sad. That's the nature of people who want something for nothing. When you charge, even a little bit, you select the bottom part of the gene pool out of your client base.

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Jul 11, 4:58 pm, "Patrick W. Gilmore" wrote: > On Jul 11, 2009, at 5:37 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote: > P.S. Anyone looking to find a good DNSBL, I would recommend Al > Iverson's web page, . Hrmmm, AHBL is not > listed there. Al's pretty clueful about such things and checks

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009, Ronald Cotoni wrote: Sadly, this is for remote hosts. I have no idea why someone would use such services as there are too many false positives. Desperation in trying to limit the amount of spam delivered. It is like using an IDS that is 2 weeks behind on it's definition

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Jul 11, 2009, at 4:40 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: Nuno Vieira - nfsi wrote: That's good to know. I'll avoid using it. Holy crap, what's with all the AHBL hate? At the very least they have a responsive human and - last time I checked - they don't require an exchange of money to get off the

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Jul 11, 2009, at 5:37 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote: Further, there is such thing as a local whitelist of IP addresses. Easier to just not use the BL. Besides, there are plenty of useful blacklists with very low FP rates who are responsive. Why use one that has high FP and is unresponsive?

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On 7/11/09 3:30 PM, Micheal Patterson wrote: "Proxy removal is functioning (sort of). Any other type of removal is no longer possible. Do not contact us about removals." That's quoted from their web site. No method of communications except through the proxy, which is only "sort of" working. So,

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On 7/11/09 12:47 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: Given that you said AHBL requires two weeks to remove good IP addresses unless there is an "established contact", I'll be sure never to use said list. Suppose my business partner gets listed? Am I to ruin our relationship for two weeks because you

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

- Original Message - From: "Seth Mattinen" To: Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2009 3:40 PM Subject: Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist? Nuno Vieira - nfsi wrote: That's good to know. I'll avoid using it. Holy crap, what's with all the AHBL hate? At

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009, Seth Mattinen wrote: Nuno Vieira - nfsi wrote: That's good to know. I'll avoid using it. Holy crap, what's with all the AHBL hate? At the very least they have a responsive human and - last time I checked - they don't require an exchange of money to get off the list.

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

Nuno Vieira - nfsi wrote: That's good to know. I'll avoid using it. Holy crap, what's with all the AHBL hate? At the very least they have a responsive human and - last time I checked - they don't require an exchange of money to get off the list. I'd hazard a guess that "two weeks" includes

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

I wouldn't condone usage of SORBS' lists, because they sometimes use robots to automatically list things that have little rational basis for being listed, which causes problems. But it may be hard to convince your mail recipients to avoid the same. Commonly, providers may give un-assigned s

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Sat, 2009-07-11 at 11:11 -0600, Brielle Bruns wrote: > On 7/11/09 11:05 AM, Ronald Cotoni wrote: > > Yes, they are really bad. It is actually quite silly that a blacklisting > > service is that slow on responding to problems. > > I find it unacceptable that people demand instant service from a

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: Given that you said AHBL requires two weeks to remove good IP addresses unless there is an "established contact", I'll be sure never to use said list. Suppose my business partner gets listed? Am I to ruin our relationship for two weeks because you are busy or don't l

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

. > > Do they take two weeks to put a spammer on the list? > > Regards, > > John > >John Souvestre - New Orleans LA > > > -Original Message- > > From: Brielle Bruns [mailto:br...@2mbit.com] > > Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2009 12:12 PM > >

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

That's good to know. I'll avoid using it. --nvieira - "Brielle Bruns" wrote: > Average turn around time for the AHBL is around two weeks if we don't have an > established contact and procedure with.

RE: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

an someone from SORBS contact me offlist? > > On 7/11/09 11:05 AM, Ronald Cotoni wrote: > > Yes, they are really bad. It is actually quite silly that a blacklisting > > service is that slow on responding to problems. > > I find it unacceptable that people demand insta

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Jul 11, 2009, at 1:11 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote: On 7/11/09 11:05 AM, Ronald Cotoni wrote: Yes, they are really bad. It is actually quite silly that a blacklisting service is that slow on responding to problems. I find it unacceptable that people demand instant service from a company the

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On 7/11/09 11:05 AM, Ronald Cotoni wrote: Yes, they are really bad. It is actually quite silly that a blacklisting service is that slow on responding to problems. I find it unacceptable that people demand instant service from a company they don't have prior business arrangements/relationship

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

Yes, they are really bad. It is actually quite silly that a blacklisting service is that slow on responding to problems. On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 11:45 AM, John Peach wrote: > On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:34:58 -0500 > James Hess wrote: > > > On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Christopher > > Morrow wr

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:34:58 -0500 James Hess wrote: > On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Christopher > Morrow wrote: > > >From www.sorbs.net: > > "It comes with great sadness that I have to announce the imminent > [snip] > > You might want to read the June 25th update they made to the > announce

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote: > >From www.sorbs.net: > "It comes with great sadness that I have to announce the imminent [snip] You might want to read the June 25th update they made to the announcement, as shown on the very same page. " SORBS has had 2 offers of hosti

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Ronald Cotoni wrote: > I need to resolve some issues that we are having with you guys but there is > a lack of timelyness with your contact forms, 28 days is simply unacceptable > :( >From www.sorbs.net: "It comes with great sadness that I have to announce the im

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

Ronald Cotoni wrote: > I need to resolve some issues that we are having with you guys but there is > a lack of timelyness with your contact forms, 28 days is simply unacceptable > :( You might also try on the spam-l.org mailing list. ~Seth

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

Sorbs was shut down just about that time ago .. On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Ronald Cotoni wrote: > I need to resolve some issues that we are having with you guys but there is > a lack of timelyness with your contact forms, 28 days is simply unacceptable > :( > -- Suresh Ramasubramanian (o

Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?

I need to resolve some issues that we are having with you guys but there is a lack of timelyness with your contact forms, 28 days is simply unacceptable :(