[anti-abuse-wg] WG Chair Mailing List Decision
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] WG Chair Mailing List Decision
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] WG Chair Mailing List Decision
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
ox
andre at ox.co.za
Sat Feb 18 06:49:52 CET 2017
On any mailing list it is not acceptable to reply to yourself. https://www.google.com/search?q=netiquette Multiple times, doing that same unacceptable thing: Is abuse. (and abusive behavior) No opinion, simple fact. This being an abuse discussion list - it is an abuse of an abuse emailing list :) Where the abuser is replying to him/her self multiple times and also proposing that email and smtp is no longer used/in use Now, that is funny! On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 05:21:18 +0000 HRH Prince Sven Olaf von CyberBunker <svenk at xs4all.nl> wrote: > basically, in your logic, all the mpaa has to do is to call the > piratebay spammers, and people should start pulling plugs. lol. it's > funny how your silly old protocol would have such a 'special status'. > > see the normal procedure for pulling plugs is : go to some applicable > court and prove they break some applicable law, also don't forget > that your problem is with the end-user and their activity, not the > isp. > > no 'dnsbl's involved in that process anywhere. > > ofcourse, should people do such things to protect against 'spam' they > also should protect the population of thailand against porn, and > protect china against falun gong, and protect the islamic state > against 'jews and cursader' propaganda. which would mean that on the > larger picture; there would not be much content left. oh wait i > forgot to ban the nazis for the communists and the communists for the > nazis and i didn't even mention to ban everything containing pictures > of, or advertising dead animals as food for the vegans. > > when we're done with all that, there won't be much internet left. > > sooooo... basically, just fix your protocol. as all that anti-spam > shit you came up with so far just sums up as : illegal violations of > net neutrality laws, as well as violating the provider immunity of > carriers and isps through blackmail and extortion. (yes breach of > contracts = financial impact = extortion, more so than robbing a > grandma for $10, as it's usually more like $100k/yr or more + > manhours) > > also everything 'ip based' you came up with over the past decades, > just fucked up the reliability and speed of smtp and made the entire > userbase switch to skype and facebook. i'm sure mickeysoft and > suckerberg thank you for that. lol. > > should you need some consultancy on how to re-design smtp, my hourly > tariff starts at EUR 2500.-/hr. quite sure you can find someone > cheaper by outsourcing it... i just give you advise for free because > YOU LOT ARE A PAIN IN THE FUCKING ASS with your constant nagging > about what-goes-on-within a CONCEPT protocol from the 1960s. > > > On 18 فبر, 2017 ص 05:07, HRH Prince Sven Olaf von CyberBunker wrote: > > btw congratutions to all of you that tried to censor me for showing > > such a complete lack of understanding of the antigue (And very > > simple, compared to habbo or skype) protocol you are trying to > > 'protect' that you clearly can't even figure out how to stop > > someone from receiving mailman (an open source project, and one of > > the most simpler programs out there, working on one of the most > > simplest protocols ever) messages... nice try tho. > > > > makes clear why in 40 years you never managed to get something as > > simple as a friends list in your protocol of choice. you clearly > > can't even configure some open source software to your wishes. > > > > the incompetence is showing through on all levels. > > > > may we remind you that you're talking to the guy that made angela > > merkel's email route over north korea. tyvm. (my guess is that is > > why the occupational forces of former germany are kinda pissed off > > with me but so be it ;) lol. > > > > > > On 18 فبر, 2017 ص 05:03, HRH Prince Sven Olaf von CyberBunker wrote: > >> also, spam is not an actual 'problem'... unless you also block tv > >> stations that have advertisements... > >> > >> which is about, all of them, if the bbc does not have such in such > >> a direct way, they hide their propaganda as 'news' but it's still > >> there. > >> > >> On 18 فبر, 2017 ص 05:01, HRH Prince Sven Olaf von CyberBunker > >> wrote: > >>> whereas spamhaus and co keep claiming to 'fight spam' the > >>> statistics on their listing speak books... > >>> > >>> it's more like 'fighting the sale of trademark infringing goods > >>> as by the definitions of the uk' > >>> > >>> 'fighting the spread of spied-upon military and diplomatic > >>> secrets of the uk and it's allies' etc. > >>> > >>> all of that while pretending it's spam or 'spam supporters'. that > >>> wikileaks listing was not an accident but a regular occurence in > >>> the statistics (yes spamhaus, we can scrape and datamine too ;) > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On 18 فبر, 2017 ص 04:59, HRH Prince Sven Olaf von CyberBunker > >>> wrote: > >>>> now why the crap would someone try to 'circumvent' tons of > >>>> mechanisms etc and hire servers at companies that 'don't ask > >>>> questions' but DO send appropriate invoices (by lack of much > >>>> competion -with balls- ;)... when they can just buy google > >>>> adwords for far less, which does get around a 1:1000 SIGNUP > >>>> rate... (never mind the clickthrough rate ;)... > >>>> > >>>> or for the same price, just get targetted tv advertisements, > >>>> really, the only people i see that would still in their right > >>>> mind send out smtp spam, are the people pretending to 'fight' it > >>>> as an excuse to keep their political trade policy censorship > >>>> tool supported by the naive nerds. > >>>> > >>>> On 18 فبر, 2017 ص 04:56, HRH Prince Sven Olaf von CyberBunker > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> btw notice that i can safely say such things, as none of our > >>>>> clients are 'spammers'... for the simple reason; the fictional > >>>>> guy that would make millions on 'spamming' is a myth kept alive > >>>>> by self-declared 'non profit anti-spam organisations' that > >>>>> de-facto are just political cyber sabotage groups to get > >>>>> content and even entire providers abroad shut down by naive > >>>>> nerds without court orders... by just shouting 'spam' alot, and > >>>>> therefore, also the most likely suspect to be sending out that > >>>>> spam, as real life advertisers, would consider the very low > >>>>> clickthrough rate of smtp (as seriously, it's really just you > >>>>> guys still using it, the rest of the world takes a fresh > >>>>> prepaid sim and creates a new gmail account every time a signup > >>>>> is needed on some silly website that won't take sms messages > >>>>> directly ;) - and at that, signups, and ripe, are the only > >>>>> remaing legitimate use of smtp. nobody in the world still uses > >>>>> that for actual communications.... getting a reaction from > >>>>> let's say the german government or the belgium toll road > >>>>> company over smtp takes... 3-4 months... by fax machine both > >>>>> take less than 1 day. (in as far as we don't just have people > >>>>> there in skype ;) > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On 18 فبر, 2017 ص 04:50, HRH Prince Sven Olaf von CyberBunker > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> spam... was stopped... a looong time ago... as in, i have not > >>>>>> seen any (persistent) spam that lasted longer than... on > >>>>>> second thought... 'delete contact' on any other protocol ;) > >>>>>> the only place where it continues to exist, is YOUR protocol. > >>>>>> so the way to stop it is to do the same. hire some developers > >>>>>> and adjust the RFC and software of smtp to get a friends list > >>>>>> and 'contact requests'. it fixes things. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> YOUR approach however is more like the 'prohibition' in the > >>>>>> usa of the 1920s. it never stopped anyone from getting drunk, > >>>>>> it did however facilitate al-capone. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> which is the thing that should have stopped to exist in 2017. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> (probably it already should have stopped to exist in 1993 ;) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 18 فبر, 2017 ص 04:02, ox wrote: > >>>>>>> On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 16:22:55 +0000 > >>>>>>> HRH Prince Sven Olaf von CyberBunker <svenk at xs4all.nl> wrote: > >>>>>>>> as for droning on... so far, this mailinglist, for the past > >>>>>>>> month or > >>>>>>>> so has been: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> spam spam spam spam spam spam spam spam spam > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> and 1 mail: law enforcement requests to the ripe ncc (a > >>>>>>>> total of 4 in > >>>>>>>> 2016) - no replies whatsoever to that one. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> then more: spam spam spam spam spam. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> funny... > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Actually no. Spam is a problem of many decades. It is a > >>>>>>> higher level > >>>>>>> service and SHOULD NOT EXIST in 2017. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The simple and salient truth is: If spam abuse is stopped > >>>>>>> then everything else falls into place. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> If you cannot route/deliver/accept email - Even if you are a > >>>>>>> Tier 1 or Google.com > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> You are screwed. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Of course, other abuse issues, as below my name, are just as > >>>>>>> important > >>>>>>> and are also frequently discussed... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> my 2c > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Andre > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> cuz we thought it should be more like 'ddos ddos ddos' > >>>>>>>> 'hijacked prefix' 'ddos' 'mass hack' 'ddos' 'someone > >>>>>>>> switched off the electricity' 'someone cut some > >>>>>>>> fibers'...'spamhaus illegally scraped > >>>>>>>> the ripe db for memberdata to blackmail them with on their > >>>>>>>> criminal > >>>>>>>> slander site' 'the americans illegally 'seized' 20000 > >>>>>>>> domains that are not even in their territory and it's time > >>>>>>>> to move icann out of the usa for that reason' -that's > >>>>>>>> network abuse- spam is not. (and the > >>>>>>>> latter only if we consider ripe and it's db a part of the > >>>>>>>> network itself) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > >
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] WG Chair Mailing List Decision
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] WG Chair Mailing List Decision
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]