* Dave Horsfall <dave@horsfall.org> [181202 17:58]:
Have you idiots ever thought of implementing some simple anti-spammeasures?
I have offered my services (free) many times, but thus far have been ignored, so I can only assume that you lot are spam-supporters.
Am I right? As it happens, I am in the middle of upgrading a Penguinbox;
all you have to do is say the word, and it'll run FreeBSD instead.
First, calling people names on this list is not acceptable behavior.
Second, you addressed the message to the list, not the list masters, so
you just called everyone on this list an idiot, even though almost no
one on this list has any direct control over the anti-spam measures in
place. The list masters are unlikely to be subscribed to every Debian mailing list, as they are a relatively small group that administers all
the official @lists.debian.org lists. To find their email address, go
to https://lists.debian.org/ (and note they likely did not see any of
your previous offers of help).
Third, the list masters are professional and expert email
administrators, and they volunteer their time to run the Debian mailing lists. Characterizing them as idiots is not only extremely rude, but as
far from the truth as you can get.
Fourth, calling someone names is not an effective way to get them to
want to help you.
Fifth, there are substantial anti-spam measures in place, as evidenced
by the fact that extremely few spam messages actually get through.
Without any anti-spam measures, you would not be able to find the
legitimate email messages due to the quantity of spam.
Sixth, if you go to https://lists.debian.org/debian-laptop/ and find the email, you can click on the "Report as spam" button. This is a big help
to the list masters.
Seventh, the list masters welcome suggestions for spamassassin rules
(and other changes). There was a recent message on debian-devel@l.d.o
giving a hint how to do that, but I'm not motivated to go find it for
you. I believe it was last month; you can search the archives.
Eighth, _why_ did you quote the spam message? If you have enough
expertise in anti-spam measures to be offering your assistance, you
ought to know that including the spam content in a legitimate email
makes it much more difficult to train any Bayesian filters in place.
...Marvin
Have you idiots ever thought of implementing some simple anti-spam measures? I have offered my services (free) many times, but thus far have been
ignored, so I can only assume that you lot are spam-supporters.
Am I right? As it happens, I am in the middle of upgrading a Penguin box; all you have to do is say the word, and it'll run FreeBSD instead.
How long should Dave wait out the problem before insulting folks? 1
month, 2 months, 6 months, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 25 years?
At
what point should constructive feedback yield to insults, and at what
point should insults yield to violence?
If your answer to that last question is "never", then I suggest you
study some history. ;-)
Are you saying that because others have, in the past, resorted to
violence that it becomes justifiable? Â
Over an offer to help that was sent to the wrong place and was thus
not answered? Â
Sorry, that is just plain wrong.
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:33 -0500, Marvin Renich wrote:
Are you saying that because others have, in the past, resorted to
violence that it becomes justifiable?
No, I'm saying lessons learned from History are to always be respected
and not ignored.
Over an offer to help that was sent to the wrong place and was thus
not answered?
Context, it's always important. The offerS have been given by several people, over several years, across several methods. I know Dave, I have
a reasonable idea of how Dave would have make his first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth offers to help. I can also imagine that it
probably took Dave at least several years, of offering *free* help,
before he blew a gasket at the continuance of a problem that he is very keenly aware of how to solve. I, on a parallel plane, have been
advocating for improvements, and complaining about the spam problem, for several years now too. I'll make a prediction, nothing will improve and obvious spam will still leak through b.d.o. At some point though,
receivers will start blocking b.d.o, they do it now selectively for some servers in the large outbound server farms of Hotmail, Google, AOL,
etc., what's Debian going to do when their single outbound b.d.o server
ends up listed on a few DNSBLs?
Sorry, that is just plain wrong.
Which part? The part about context mattering?
-Jim P.
* Jim Popovitch <jim@k4vqc.com> [181203 15:21]:He should at least wait until he gets its facts right. Afair/afaik there
How long should Dave wait out the problem before insulting folks? 1
month, 2 months, 6 months, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 25 years?
The correct answer is "much longer than 25 years".
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:33 -0500, Marvin Renich wrote:
Are you saying that because others have, in the past, resorted to
violence that it becomes justifiable?
No, I'm saying lessons learned from History are to always be respected
and not ignored.
Over an offer to help that was sent to the wrong place and was thus
not answered?
Context, it's always important. The offerS have been given by several
Sorry, that is just plain wrong.
Which part? The part about context mattering?
How long should Dave wait out the problem before insulting folks? 1
month, 2 months, 6 months, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 25 years? At
what point should constructive feedback yield to insults, and at what
point should insults yield to violence?
If your answer to that last question is "never", then I suggest you
study some history. ;-)
On Mon, 03 Dec 2018 23:56:22 -0500 Jim Popovitch <jim@k4vqc.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:33 -0500, Marvin Renich wrote:
Are you saying that because others have, in the past, resorted to violence that it becomes justifiable? Â
No, I'm saying lessons learned from History are to always be
respected
and not ignored.
Over an offer to help that was sent to the wrong place and was
thus
not answered? Â
Context, it's always important.  The offerS have been given by
several
...
Sorry, that is just plain wrong.
Which part?  The part about context mattering?
Maybe the part implying that revolutionary violence can be appropriate against listmasters who provide a free service - which you are
perfectly free to opt out of - simply because they fail (in your view)
to provide better anti-spam measures?
This is what you wrote:
How long should Dave wait out the problem before insulting folks?  1 month, 2 months, 6 months, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 25 years?   At what point should constructive feedback yield to insults, and at
what point should insults yield to violence?
If your answer to that last question is "never", then I suggest you
study some history.  ;-)
Celejar
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:33 -0500, Marvin Renich wrote:
Are you saying that because others have, in the past, resorted to
violence that it becomes justifiable?
No, I'm saying lessons learned from History are to always be respected
and not ignored.
How long should Dave wait out the problem before insulting folks?======
[snip] At======
what point should constructive feedback yield to insults, and at what
point should insults yield to violence?======
If your answer to that last question is "never", then I suggest you
study some history. ;-)
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:33 -0500, Marvin Renich wrote:
Over an offer to help that was sent to the wrong place and was thus
not answered?
Context, it's always important. The offerS have been given by several people, over several years, across several methods.
I know Dave, I have
a reasonable idea of how Dave would have make his first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth offers to help. I can also imagine that it
probably took Dave at least several years, of offering *free* help,
before he blew a gasket at the continuance of a problem that he is very keenly aware of how to solve.
I, on a parallel plane, have been
advocating for improvements, and complaining about the spam problem, for several years now too.
I'll make a prediction, nothing will improve and
obvious spam will still leak through b.d.o.
Sorry, that is just plain wrong.
Which part? The part about context mattering?
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:33 -0500, Marvin Renich wrote:
Are you saying that because others have, in the past, resorted to
violence that it becomes justifiable?
Over an offer to help that was sent to the wrong place and was thus
not answered?
* Jim Popovitch <jim@k4vqc.com> [181203 23:57]:
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:33 -0500, Marvin Renich wrote:
Are you saying that because others have, in the past, resorted to violence that it becomes justifiable? Â
No, I'm saying lessons learned from History are to always be
respected and not ignored.
That's not what you wrote.  Here it is:
* Jim Popovitch <jim@k4vqc.com> [181203 15:21]:
How long should Dave wait out the problem before insulting folks?
           ======
[snip] At
what point should constructive feedback yield to insults, and at
what
             ======
point should insults yield to violence?
        ======
If your answer to that last question is "never", then I suggest you
study some history.  ;-)
You asked "should", which is asking what is appropriate.  History can rarely be used to answer that question.  And you should never respect
wrong historical choices (for the definition of "respect" meaning "esteem").  If by "respect" you meant "keep in mind", that has
absolutely nothing to do with "should".
* Jim Popovitch <jim@k4vqc.com> [181203 23:57]:
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:33 -0500, Marvin Renich wrote:
Over an offer to help that was sent to the wrong place and was
thus not answered? Â
Context, it's always important.  The offerS have been given by
several people, over several years, across several methods.
What offers?  I have seen very few offers from anyone, and I have been subscribed to this list for a long time.  Can you give a URL from the archives at lists.debian.org?
I know Dave, I have a reasonable idea of how Dave would have make
his first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth offers to
help.  I can also imagine that it probably took Dave at least
several years, of offering *free* help, before he blew a gasket at
the continuance of a problem that he is very keenly aware of how to
solve.
Searching this list's archive specifically for "horsfall", I get 57
matches, 24 that are from him.  Of those 24, this is the only other
one related to spam:
 https://lists.debian.org/debian-laptop/2018/01/msg00001.html
 I didn't know that spamming was allowed on this list; can I spam
too?
That doesn't sound like a constructive offer to help.  Your
"reasonable idea" of how he would make his first through sixth offers
to help does not match the evidence in the archive.
I, on a parallel plane, have been advocating for improvements, and complaining about the spam problem, for several years now too.
How about giving real help instead of complaining?
I'll make a prediction, nothing will improve and
obvious spam will still leak through b.d.o.
It appears that you have no idea how much spam is actually being
rejected compared to the very few that actually make it through.  You
will never get both 0 false positives and 0 false negatives on any
sizeable mailing list.
Or perhaps you do have an idea, you just have an unrealistic
expectation that _zero_ spam getting through is easily attainable.
Sorry, that is just plain wrong.
Which part?  The part about context mattering?
Huh?  Your irrelevant and unsubstantiated remark about context was in
your reply to that message, not in the message to which that was a reply.  Talk about ignoring context!  My comment was given precisely
in context, but I'll copy it here just to try to be clear:
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:33 -0500, Marvin Renich wrote:
Are you saying that because others have, in the past, resorted to violence that it becomes justifiable? Â
Over an offer to help that was sent to the wrong place and was
thus not answered? Â
To rephrase that, your message gave a clear implication that history
was a justification for why "never" was not the correct answer toÂ
"at what point should insults yield to violence?", and I was saying
that> "never" is, indeed, the correct answer to that question.
I think you have a false impression of what the end goal should be , you
seem too willing to accept some level of spam (status quo?). Zero spam *is* done by many other mailing list operators.
Two observations:
1. By my count, post "about spam" have generated more clutter than
the spam I have observed.
Spam here are noticeably less than on other BB, email list, forums I monitor/moderate.
2. One disadvantages of "zero spam" in a BB/mail-list with world wide members is the high prospect of false positives. The possibility of penalizing a contributor based on their ISP or neighborhood would be counter productive.
2. One disadvantages of "zero spam" in a BB/mail-list with world wideCan you cite an example where a legitimate contributor's email was
members is the high prospect of false positives. The possibility of
penalizing a contributor based on their ISP or neighborhood would be
counter productive.
blocked based on their ISP or neighborhood where 1) the ISP wasn't voluntarily listed in the PBL, and 2) the "neighborhood" was not a known cesspool of spammers?
-Jim P.
On 12/4/2018 12:14 PM, Jim Popovitch wrote:
2. One disadvantages of "zero spam" in a BB/mail-list with world
wideÂ
members is the high prospect of false positives. The possibility
ofÂ
penalizing a contributor based on their ISP or neighborhood would
beÂ
counter productive.
Can you cite an example where a legitimate contributor's email was
blocked based on their ISP or neighborhood where 1) the ISP wasn't voluntarily listed in the PBL, and 2) the "neighborhood" was not a
known
cesspool of spammers?
-Jim P.
Of course not! Members of any list would not see a blocked
contributor, and therefor not be in a position to evaluate their
legitimacy.
But personally I have been blocked by HotMail, because my host/VSP
with (un-shared) fixed IP is in a "Bad IP block."Â A quick review of SpamCop/TALOS spamassassin, and others didn't find a listing for the
/16 block in question.Â
The closest I (or anyone using email at one of the domains IÂ
manage/host) come to spam is as treasure of a non-profit. I send
financial reports to the other board members ~~ one board member has
a HotMail account. So who knows why my IP was blocked until I
objected. It is anecdotal, yet a citation you requested.Â
But enough clutter.
Lou
On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 14:23 -0700, Lou wrote:
On 12/4/2018 12:14 PM, Jim Popovitch wrote:
2. One disadvantages of "zero spam" in a BB/mail-list with world
wideÂ
members is the high prospect of false positives. The
possibility ofÂ
penalizing a contributor based on their ISP or neighborhood
would beÂ
counter productive.
Can you cite an example where a legitimate contributor's email was blocked based on their ISP or neighborhood where 1) the ISP wasn't voluntarily listed in the PBL, and 2) the "neighborhood" was not a
known
cesspool of spammers?
-Jim P.
Of course not! Members of any list would not see a blocked
contributor, and therefor not be in a position to evaluate their legitimacy.
So you have no example of anyone other than yourself being blocked,
correct?
Third, the list masters are professional and expert email
administrators, and they volunteer their time to run the Debian mailing lists. Characterizing them as idiots is not only extremely rude, but as
far from the truth as you can get.
Context, it's always important. The offerS have been given by several people, over several years, across several methods. I know Dave, I have
a reasonable idea of how Dave would have make his first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth offers to help. I can also imagine that it
probably took Dave at least several years, of offering *free* help,
before he blew a gasket at the continuance of a problem that he is very keenly aware of how to solve. I, on a parallel plane, have been
advocating for improvements, and complaining about the spam problem, for several years now too. I'll make a prediction, nothing will improve and obvious spam will still leak through b.d.o.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 63:01:52 |
| Calls: | 6,654 |
| Files: | 12,200 |
| Messages: | 5,331,693 |