Thor, On Wednesday, 2012-08-15 20:43:03 +0300, "Thor Kottelin" <thor.kottelin@turvasana.com> wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net [mailto:anti-abuse-wg- bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of lists@help.org Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 8:01 PM To: <anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>
On 8/15/2012 11:55 AM, Luis Muñoz wrote:
In my experience, lists managed through those principles tend to fall out of use relatively quickly and are therefore rather inconsequential for mail delivery.
That is not my experience. For instance, you can readily find complaints about Microsoft and Cisco as well as some of the contributors to this list.
One can probably 'find complaints' about whichever matter in existence. Highly useful and widely used DNSBLs tend to draw particularly large amounts of irate complaints from people whose resources have been listed.
"The plural of anecdote is not data."(*) I find this particular bit of the exchange interesting. I wonder if there are metrics - preferably open and peer-reviewed metrics - for the quality of black list or other abuse reporting sites? This seems like it could be useful, and not only for arguments on the anti-abuse mailing list. :) -- Shane (*) I was going to attribute this, but it's not clear where this originated from: http://bearcastle.com/blog/?p=408