Re: *****SPAM***** Welcome to Join4Free.Com

["Kristopher Barrett" <kbarrett@cotse.com>]

> On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Kristopher Barrett wrote:
>> >> http://userpages.umbc.edu/~ian/procmail.html
>> > there is no reason for non-subscribers to post to the list. that
>> would stop all the spam dead.
>> I respectfully disagree. There are more than a few regimes that would
>> react violently to anyone they felt should be under their thumb who
>> requested information about strong cryptography. Allowing anon posts
>> lets these folks get info without risking their lives.
>
> rofl. sure.

The SLORC in Burma regularly troll USENET and web forums looking for
critics to attack and/or silence. The Church of Scientolgy also spends an
enormous amount of time looking for critics to slap with lawsuits. You can
also add more than a few central and south american countries, and a
shitload of middle east regimes to that list.

>
> point me out one time this has EVER happened on this list.
>
> now i can point you to the MANY times its been abused for porno spams.

Non-sequitor. State thugs aren't in a habit of bragging about evil deeds
on email lists. You will see the spam, but some poor fuck who speaks out
about an evil government will just go silent once he or his family becomes
known.

>
> and the day someone anon posts child porn to the list through this hole,
> i guarantee the list will be shut down permanently by the feds.

Were you planning on doing it? We did have a nut named Ken Pangborn who
took on anon remailers singlehandedly... posting nazi and klan filth on
USENET through them in an attempt to get them shut down. They refused to
hand over the names of posters he thought were slandering him, and he
threw a hissyfit that continues in alt.usenet.kooks and the men's support
groups to this day.

>
> it's a disaster waiting to happen.
>

I doubt it.

> and you're advocating list abuse.
>

Exactly where did I make a post advocating abuse? Put words in your own
mouth, not mine.


>> The list "owner" could blacklist spammers... but this would require
>> him to devote time better spent programming to list moderation. He
>> might even have to pay for a better service. I'm sure what he has now
>> is free of costs.
>
> only allowing subscribers to post is the proper fix. it requires zero
> effort.

If you think you know what the proper fix is, then start your own damned
list.

As for myself, I feel you are not worth arguing with, and am placing your
address in my killfile.... what you should have done in the first place.


-- 
Regards,
Kristopher Barrett    http://www.cotse.net/users/kbarrett



-
Linux-crypto:  cryptography in and on the Linux system
Archive:       http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-crypto/