[SURBL-Discuss] [SURBL-Announce] SURBL Usage Policy change

QQQQ qqqq at usermail.com
Fri Nov 7 00:20:22 CET 2008


Wow!

I just looked at the difference.  Use the comma!!!

B

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chris Santerre" <csanterre at MerchantsOverseas.com>
To: "'SURBL Discussion list'" <discuss at lists.surbl.org>; "SURBL Zones" 
<zones at lists.surbl.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 2:46 PM
Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] [SURBL-Announce] SURBL Usage Policy change


>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Joseph Brennan [mailto:brennan at columbia.edu]
>> Sent: 2008-11-06 16:21
>> To: discuss at lists.surbl.org; SURBL Zones
>> Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] [SURBL-Announce] SURBL Usage
>> Policy change
>>
>>
>>
>> At--  SURBL usage policy: http://www.surbl.org/usage-policy.html
>>
>> I get very different pricing depending whether I input 80,000 users
>> or 80000 users (same number, no comma).
>>
>> Number of messages does not affect it.
>>
>> At the price for 80,000 (sic) I have no objection at all.  At the
>> other price I'll really have to analyze how much we block with it.
>> I'm not sure what conclusion I will reach.
>
> I do not speak for SURBL in any way. I would say anyone who is thinking of
> not using it due to policy changes should discuss this with them OFFLIST. 
> I
> believe this is not ment to hinder people using it, or even become filthy
> rich. Just to keep the darn thing running :) But thats just my opinion.
>
> Jeff is good people ;)
>
> --Chris
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.surbl.org
> http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> 



More information about the Discuss mailing list