At 17:32 2004-09-30 -0700, Jeff Chan wrote:
On Thursday, September 30, 2004, 2:22:34 PM, Chris Santerre wrote:
From: Patrik Nilsson [mailto:patrik@patrik.com] We're not just whitelisting domains because someone, who doesn't even bother to argue why, asks us to, do we?
"This is reported as spam, looks like spam and smells like spam, but we will whitelist it just because it might be caught by other antispam systems anyway" isn't a very convincing argument.
^LOL^ Oh I'm not comenting in that one ;) I'll let Jeff explain it, because I still don't understand this one.
The question is whether they have legitimate uses.
I have no problem with that question - what I have a problem with is how we arrived at the answer that, yes - quickinspirations.com do have legitimate uses. I have still not seen *anything* that would lead to that answer.
All I've seen mentioned is a request to whitelist it, a request that didn't provide any information at all on why it should be whitelisted.
Everything else that I have seen indicates that this is a known spammer. And that includes the argument that RBLs will catch it anyway.
Patrik