Hy, Ed.Greshko@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Apr 2003, Jesse Keating wrote: > > > > Personally, these RBL's suck big time. They have *not* reduced the amount > > > of spam I get. But they force me to spend more money in some way or > > > another. I've been toying with the idea of starting a "Stamp out RBL" > > > movement. > > > > Bummer, because the RBLs I use on my mail server cut down my spam by about > > 80%. I kid you not, overnight the amount of spam to my inbox dropped by > > about 20 messages a day to about 3. > > Well, *if* you can use RBLs and *if* the use of RBLs by others doesn't > prevent you from sending legitimate email then they *may* be OK. But, as > I've said, unless I pay more I'm stuck being a target of RBLs. > > A "solution" that costs more than I am willing to pay is no solution. > > > I have yet to miss an email that was important either. > > Right, I said I paid to an SMTP Relay service. ;-) ;-) Every ISP should provide a SMTP Relay for its customers. period. Every Customer should use that SMTP Relay. period. Using RBLs to reject mails from dialup ip addresses is a good practice, well done and should be done as often as possible. period. The cyber world doesn't consists of just idealists anymore. There are to many bad guys out there in the wild (and bad girls as well of course! *g*) doing bad things and therefor something has to be done. Using DUL RBLs can help a lot and in fact they have cut down the spam on my mail servers bye a huge amount. The best thing of RBLs is that they allow you to reject the mail before it is completely delivered which helps avoiding traffic and also give the spammers the feed back they deserve. Bye Dirk -- Psyche-list mailing list Psyche-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/psyche-list
