IP address reputation, BorderWare
email at ace.net.au
Fri Apr 6 04:22:38 IST 2007
Perhaps a pity that you didn't take this one to private email?
I think most of us are pretty tired of this by now.
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 5/04/2007 at 4:24 PM Rick Chadderdon wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Apr 2007, Rick Chadderdon wrote:
>>> I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and simply assume that
>>> my writing style is not clear enough for me to make a point to you.
>> Rick you've made your point, you dont like people using it,
>That's *not* my point. That's merely a related fact. The point I was
>trying to make was *why* I don't like it. And the discussion I was
>trying to get from you was philosophical. I wanted to know whether you
>justify all behavior based upon the *amount* of effect it has on others
>or upon whether it has any unjustified effect at all. Whether a
>third-party effect is the same as a direct response. I have repeatedly
>stated that if this was the norm, I'd have no problem with it. It is
>not. It is an add-on tossed into the war on spam which is so easily
>circumvented that as soon as it becomes effective for more than a
>handful of people, the spammers will respond by *using it as a tool to
>make their spam delivery more efficient*. (Which basically means that
>if it was the norm, it would be useless.)
>Again, if effectiveness is the measure of justification for anti-spam
>tools, then TMDA should be used by everyone, right? It forces spammers
>to use a server that will be there long enough to respond, and if
>spammers were to begin using an automatic response system, the same
>anti-ocr techniques they use in their image spam could be used to defeat
>the spammers by including obfuscated captcha images in the TMDA
>challenge message. If you don't care about the impact on innocent third
>parties, challenge-response is a great tool. The fact that you aren't
>sitting here advocating the use of TMDA implies that you do justify the
>use of a tool by the amount of collateral damage rather than the fact
>that the damage exists at all. If third-party impact doesn't enter into
>your decision not to advocate challenge-response techniques - say you're
>going entirely on the impact on speed of delivery - then I'd like to
>know. I want to know *why we disagree*, not just be told "get used to
>it 'cause people are going to do it." Oh, and if you *do* advocate
>challenge-response, I'd kind of like to know that, too, 'cause that
>would tell me a lot... :)
>I want to understand how other people think, and, sometimes, whether
>they think at all.
>*That* is my point.
>>> If you're being deliberately obtuse for the joy of argument, please
>>> don't bother - I don't enjoy that kind of fight, anymore.
>> No, but you are starting to come accross as one who accuses others of
>> not seeing your point or argueing 'for the sake of it' because we will
>> not turn around and say its a bad thing because some see it as a good
>No, I don't expect agreement. I merely want you to explain how you
>justify the use of one third-party invasive tool over another. I
>suspect that it's the degree of impact which you use to make your
>decision. If so, that's fine. We won't agree, but you will at least
>have been honest with me about why you think it's okay. And I'll know
>that you "got my point." And, to be honest, I'll get to feel morally
>superior. :) But how I "feel" shouldn't matter to you, since how I
>feel about SAV doesn't bother you.
>I don't think there's much of a "we" thing going on, Res. It's just
>been you and me for quite a while. Everyone else pretty much admitted
>that they were being pragmatic about the amount of impact they felt the
>technique had, versus its effectiveness. It's seemed to me that *you*
>were the one sidestepping the question and "arguing for the sake of
>it". Good to know that it was just a difference of perception.
>Anyway, this is (really!) my last response to this thread. I'll respond
>to any further discussion with private email, unless requested otherwise.
>MailScanner mailing list
>mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
>Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
>Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
More information about the MailScanner