[SURBL-Discuss] Re: Jeff's whitelists

Jeff Chan jeffc at surbl.org
Mon Jul 26 04:15:49 CEST 2004

On Monday, July 26, 2004, 12:00:01 AM, Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Jeff Chan wrote:
>> I would contend abuse of spamarrest's services, as you
>> originally described them, is closer to a Joe Job than
>> outright spam by spamarrest.

> IBTD.  And if you read some of the 166 messages shown by...

> <http://www.google.com/groups?q=spamarrest.com+group%3A*.net-abuse.*+-group%3A*.sightings>

> ...you'll find that I'm not exactly alone with this opinion.

I don't dispute that they have abusive and brain-dead policies
and designs, but the key question is do they have any legitimate
uses?  If so we probably can't list them.

Jeff C.

More information about the Discuss mailing list