Double Irony! (was Re: [linux-elitists] ruben's stupid filter)
Wed Mar 13 19:57:07 PST 2002
Absolutely 100% freaking right-on, mr.bad.
If only somebody could somehow get the clue-by-four to the head
of Seattle consultant Julian Haight * and his spamcop.net effort **
including its regrettable presence on sourceforge ***. Or better
yet, his users. Sad to say, the clueless responses you describe
below, to your own writings on related matters, seem to carry
The lazy bastardos who use this particlar latter-day spiritual
successor to the tools of Stanford Wallace not only send out
autoreplies via their crummy bubble-headed coarse-grained filters,
but they mask the origin of these autoreplies by sending them
through an anonymous remailer at spamcop.net!!
In language calculated to give an impression of a steel fist in
a velvet glove, you the object of such a complaint are requested,
nay, required to visit the spamcop site and respond, preferably
indicating that your terrible transgression will not be repeated.
Complaints may also go to all of your listed contacts and the
listed contacts of your upstream provider. At least they have
for us, for example in response to the mention of our "spamvertised
website www.linuxjournal.com" in the (obviously abusive) traffic of
one California LUG.
This represents the sort of abuse described below, on steroids
and with anonymity shields up, yet.
Strangely enough the references I can find on the web to this
despicable effort of Mr. Haight's are almost unanimously positive.
* resume at http://www.julianhaight.com
On Sun, Mar 10, 2002 at 11:51:30AM -0600, Mr. Bad wrote:
> >>>>> "KMS" == Karsten M Self <email@example.com> writes:
> KMS> SA tagged the message as spam and my procmail autoreporting
> KMS> rules (set to trigger at a threshold of 10, not SA's default
> KMS> "5 and you're spam" threshold) sent the mail to his
> KMS> employer's NOC.
> So, I got to say, I really, really, really hate this auto-reporting
> white-list challenging crap. It's goddamned rude to your absolutely
> legitimate correspondents.
> The problem is that any auto-reply or challenge makes me jump through
> some kind of hoop just because *your* spam filters are not smart
> enough to tell the difference between my worthwhile mail and some
> UCE. Admittedly, the kind of language recognition that would be able
> decisively and without fail to detect spam is astronomically hard. But
> that still doesn't make it right for *me* to have to pay the price for
> their failure or indecision.
> It's asinine of you to put the time cost that your spam incurs into
> *my* ledger. I have my own damn spam to deal with, and I don't want to
> have to pay the price in time and effort for dealing with _your_ spam,
> too. *I* didn't write your crummy bubble-headed coarse-grained
> filters, did I?
> It'd be much, much better for you just to flag suspicious messages and
> put them in a slops bucket folder that gets checked and cleared out
> once a week. Sure, it's 30 seconds extra work for you to scan the
> folder, find my diamond, and whitelist me, but at least *you* are the
> one making the effort to keep your own damn inbox free of spam.
> Spammers are Bad because they abuse the time, attention, and digital
> resources of others without permission. Everyone who sends out "My
> filter thinks you're spam so jump through this hoop" messages, are
> doing the same damn thing. They are a tinhorn Sanford Wallaces of the
> 21st Century.
> I'm sick of doing the spam-fighting work for lazy bastardos who
> consider themselves quite smart for sending out autoreplies. Get over
> yourselves! You're not that goddamned important.
> ~Mr. Bad
> P.S. I apologize to anyone who's already seen this rant in one form or
> the other. I've sent it out like 6 times this week. Half the time I
> get back messages that completely miss the point, saying, "But spam is
> really bad!" No shit, firstname.lastname@example.org. So is being a rude asshole
> to everyone who's writing email to you.
> Mr. Bad <email@example.com> | Pigdog Journal | http://pigdog.org/
Dan Wilder <firstname.lastname@example.org> Technical Manager & Editor
SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549 Phone: 206-782-8808
Seattle, WA 98155-0549 URL http://embedded.linuxjournal.com/
More information about the linux-elitists