Ive been listed in list.dsbl.org - how do I configure so as to get unlisted

[Collins Richey]

On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 11:40:58 -0600
Andrew Mathews <andrew_mathews at linux-works.org> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Collins Richey wrote:
> | On 06 Sep 2003 07:52:26 -0400
> | burns <linux at burnsmacdonald.com> wrote:
> |
> |
> |>These people are operating on vigilante principles... they don't
> |care.>If they can eliminate 80% of spam by blackholing 15% of the
> |genuine>innocent mail users, they are happy. It's a war and they
> |don't care>who gets hurt - they consider it justifiable collateral
> |damage.>
> |>The scary thing is no-one voted for these guys, they weren't
> |appointed>by any government agency and they aren't accountable to
> |anyone. These>are just people who are feeding their ego and
> |power-tripping on how>they are 'saving the world.'
> |>--
> |
> |
> | And you wonder why some organizations have an aversion to open
> | source. These cowboys are no better than the cows they are trying to
> | herd.
> |
> 
> And the alternative is? They have to fight an ever escalating battle
> with the spammers, who, by the way, don't seem to give a shit about
> "innocent" users either. They're fighting fire with fire, and
> unfortunately, some people are caught in the middle. But if you're
> blaming the Sysadmins or DNSBL's for your woes, you're blaming the
> wrong people. If the friggin' spammers weren't being the abusive
> assholes that they are, NONE of this would be necessary. It's like
> saying "Don't back that fire truck over my flower bed! I'd rather let
> the fire burn down my house!" Or a dictum from a CEO who has *no*
> concept of what they demand: Monday: "Turn off those filters! I can't
> get mail from Hotmail!" Tuesday: "Why didn't you fix the spam problem?
> Are you ignorant?" Wednesday: "I can't get mail from Hotmail again!"
> Thursday: "Why do I have 100 spam messages again?"
> Friday: "You're incompetent, so I'm firing you."
> 

Yes, it is a no win situation.  My previous employer allowed no mail
retrieval from the corporate network accept via the corporate Outlook
system.  Inconvenient for a few, but it worked.  It still failed to
protect them from the soBig virus <grin>.

What all of us are describing is a more insidious thing.  Yes, there is
lots of spam, but inventive mail filters can be devised to filter much
of it to/dev/null.  I'm only interested in the little guy: me.  My
computer is not infected with anything, and I resent it when one of the
big guys (you in this case, or anyone who subscribes to the kill
anything in a broad range theory) decides to make my life difficult
because I have a superficial resemblance (i.e. similar ip address) to
someone who happens to be a bad guy.


-- 
Collins Richey - Denver Area
if you fill your heart with regrets of yesterday and the 
worries of tomorrow, you have no today to be thankful for.