Chris Santerre wrote to 'Jeff Chan' and 'SURBL Discussion list':
WOW I can't believe the analysis paralysis we got going on here!
:-)
I say we don't add anything to the unconfirmed (I'm not calling it grey anymore) list until we get at least 2-3 people on this list to agree to. No one person should add to unconfirmed. We end up discussing these anyway when we check for blacklisting. So we will already be discussing.
I see the unconfirmed list being very small for now.
We don't put it in multi for now.
I'm still doing all the work to check for blacklist submission, but I realize they have the possibility of having some small % of legit use. Like less then 20%. Then I'm asking the list to vote for unconfirmed. Simple.
Good idea.
Otherwise if it is 50% ham/spam, it doesn't get listed even in unconfirmed.
Simple as that. No extra work. We try here just in this list. Don't make it public yet.
This changes absolutely nothing I don't already do for SURBL. Just asks for 2 others to agree with me, which I already do for "iffy" domains.
This will also change submissions making it EASIER for us. People who do a SURBL lookup would see it has ALREADY been submitted and has been found to be unconfirmed by the SURBL team. One less submission and one less person saying "Why haven't you added them?"
Who said they were up for hosting this?
Me. It's already set up. uc@sasknow.com is the submission address. Access to the data can be granted on an individual basis.
Because I'm ready to do this alone if I have to. There is a need, even if we only use it internally for research and not make it public, I need to know some of this info.
Agreed! Let's do it.
I'm going to start that other thread, now... suggestions will be welcome.
- Ryan