RE: [cobalt-users] OT : Webhosting Coalition

["Dan Kriwitsky" <list1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> 
> >It blocks tons of spam on my server.
> 
> As well as tons of legitimate email that you are unaware of.

No, otherwise the bounce message would have said how to contact me and
none have.

> 
> >ISP's quickly find they can't shuffle spammers around and 
> their /24 or 
> >larger will be blocked if they harbor spammers.
> 
> Interesting to note, SPEWS won't "Play Games" with the 
> Larger/Largest ISP's where the Bulk of SPAM comes from 
> anyway. Know Why? Because the largest ISP's have staff 
> attorneys just waiting with a lawsuit for such an interuption 
> to their business.

Really? Huge portions of Sprint are blocked by SPEWS as are UUnet and
other larger ISPs. So far, no lawsuit. Do you really believe that you
can stop someone from publishing a list of IPs they have received spam
from? That's all SPEWS does. What others, like myself, choose to do with
that list is up to them. Are you going to sue me because I choose who I
will accept traffic from on my server?

> 
> >They respond very quickly to posts in news.admin.net-abuse.email
> 
> Agreed, they respond with crude 1-liners, just like you have 
> done here!

No, SPEWS doesn't post. You're not paying attention. You're hearing from
other frustrated recipients. You still haven't read the FAQ. Have you
also seen the posts by the admin from your ISP? "Done!  We have
terminated all spammers that were generating complaints." Turns out when
he posted that there were many domains with well documented spamming
records still being hosted there. Did he think lying would get them
delisted? He posted specifically regarding one spammer and claimed they
were completely disconnected from their network.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=2629fb61.0212012107.5fcf155d%40post
ing.google.com&output=gplain
My guess is, based on the amount of time it took them to act on spam
complaints and that blatant lie and continued spam support they gave to
one spammer is why it's taking them so long to be delisted. I've rarely
seen an ISP post that they disconnected a spammer only to then turn
around and provide services to that spammer again. Just look at the list
of domains they hosted at http://www.spews.org/html/S2067.html and
ignored complaints for months. Probably everyone on this list got spam
from those domains. I would guess that some of those blocks are now in
people's private block lists and will be harder to get out of than
SPEWS.

> 
> >No, ever try to read the FAQ?
> 
> Yes, twice.
> 
> >Bingo. Wholesalebandwidth.com is a spamhaus. You may as well 
> ask Pizza 
> >Hut to deliver to a crack house.
> 
> If that was true, then why stop there?  Why not block the 
> entire IP address space of Cogent & Verio, which are the 
> ISP(s) that Wholesalebandwidth buys connectivity from? If 
> your accusation hold true, then isn't really the big
> ISP(s) that are harboring the spamhaus?  NO, SPEWS won't risk 
> the lawsuit by messing with such a big ISP.

Much of Verio is blocked by Spews. Read that newsgroup and you see
frequent posts by Verio abuse desk people now pointing out the IP blocks
and the names of the spammers cited in the SPEWS record that they have
now cancelled service to.

> 
> >No, because your ISP harbors spammers.
> 
> So you too are suggesting I switch providers? Put nearly 200 
> dedicated server customers through an IP renumber and the 
> downtime associated with Name Server renumber propragation? 

Then stay listed in SPEWS. Should the rest of the Internet accept
traffic from a network known to harbor spammers just because it's going
to be difficult for you to move?

> ALL because of an Anonymous service with no Legitimate 
> contact info?  Where is the Logic with that?

It's your choice. Your provider can solve your problem by booting the
spammers they host and not lying about it. Or, you can solve your
problem by moving. You wouldn't be the first to do so.

> >I bet you aren't getting a single email from SPEWS. You're getting 
> >email from people fed up with spam from Wholesalebandwidth.com 
> >customers.
> 
> Do you know who SPEWS is?

No.

> How do you know who is sending me SPAM because of my post to 
> news.admin.net-abuse.email?

I don't, anymore than you do. There are a couple of documented whackos
that post "Rot in SPEWS" in reply to every single post.

> Isn't what they are doing to me 
> REALLY what they claim to be trying to prevent?

SPEWS isn't "doing" anything to you. If you posted a request to be
removed from SPEWS while your upstream was still hosting spammers, you
ignored the FAQ. That you choose to post to Usenet with your real email
address got you spam is not a surprise. It's why I no longer use a real
email address when posting to Usenet.

> 
> >Works great here.
> 
> Another 1-liner.

No, another fact.

> >Please reply to the list only. Off list replies are not read.
> 
> I too use the filters within Outlook to filter most SPAM into 
> a folder called SPAM, which I simply empty on a regular basis.
> 
> 

I prefer to stop the spam from ever getting to Outlook. (BTW, SPAM is
the registered trademark for that pink canned meat. Lowercase spam
refers to the email variety.)
-- 
C2002 Dan Kriwitsky

Please reply to the list only. Off list replies are not read.