[SURBL-Discuss] Help!!!!!!!!!!!
SURBL Whitelisters
whitelist at surbl.org
Fri May 8 17:58:06 CEST 2009
On 5/8/09, webdev <webdev at storedk.com> wrote:
> " We don't filter our removal requests using our own data. If we did
> that, then how would anyone be able to contact us about removals?"
>
>
> This is exactly what I'm trying to get across. Whatever method you are using is
> preventing us from using the email address you give us.
Can you provide a bounce or error message? Because the whitelist
address currently has almost no filtering on it.
Try sending a message to see if it gets through to whitelist at surbl . org
If it doesn't get through, then post the bounce here and we'll try to
correct any problems.
As you can see we are trying to make a good effort.
> I already stated that I know you are not the one doing the blocking. I'm trying to
> suggest that your list would be far more valuable if you didn't include domains
> that were not guilty of spamming. This requires an easy method to report problems.
We have a web form and email address that most people have no problem using.
If you're having difficulty, will you let us help with it?
> I have contacted email admins in the past with a simple email requesting
> whitelisting and they took care of it in a couple of days. Both parties understood
> that if there was a real spam problem, the whitelisting would be removed.
SURBL removal requests are often processed within a few hours.
> Here you are treated as an enemy until you find a way to prove otherwise.
Given the above, that would appear to be a misperception or mistatement.
> I've
> already taken care of our problem by getting the other email administrators to
> stop using the list.
Who are the mail administrators? Can we contact them to let them hear
our side?
> Now I'm just trying to help others that got caught in the
> same catch 22 that I did. Saying that you are not responsible for how others use
> your information, while true, demonstrates a total lack of sympathy for the plight
> that innocent people find themselves in as a result of the information you
> provide.
If you knew how much effort we put into data quality, you would know
that your statement is unfair.
> I would think that you would have an interest in providing the most
> accurate information possible.
Of course. Independent tests show that our information is highly accurate.
Reference:
http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/
More information about the Discuss
mailing list