Subject: RE: Spam suggestion...
To: 'Herb Peyerl' <hpeyerl@beer.org>
From: John Schieferle Uhlenbrock <lordzero@lordzero.org>
List: current-users
Date: 02/22/2004 14:46:49
The only real way I could see a cut down on spam is one of two ways, =
both
causing some pain in the ass stuff:

1) just mod the whole list (yeah right)
2) require registration for people who would like to post to the list =
but
continue to allow anyone to recieve

- John Schieferle Uhlenbrock



-----Original Message-----
From: current-users-owner@NetBSD.org =
[mailto:current-users-owner@NetBSD.org]
On Behalf Of Herb Peyerl
Sent: Sonntag, 22. Februar 2004 14:38
To: Peter Seebach
Cc: current-users@NetBSD.org
Subject: Re: Spam suggestion...=20


Sun, 22 Feb 2004 07:22:03 -0600.
             <200402221322.i1MDM3Nr014275@guild.plethora.net>=20
 > Yes, it does.  There is no sysadmin incapable of providing valid =
reverse
> DNS, and this simple filter gets rid of a very large quantity of spam.

I'm a sysadmin and I don't have authority for some of the address space =
for
some of my machines coloed in some facilities.  Does this reflect poorly =
on
me as a sysadmin or does it reflect poorly on you for making grand and=20
baseless assumptions?