The 'right' that appears to be being defended here is the right of
sysops to make decisions on behalf of their users with no
accountability.
Nobody said anything about "no accountability." I sense here
nothing more
than a strong hatred of DNSbls, likely due to a bad
experience with them.
Of course nobody said anything against either motherhood or applepie.
The problem I have with blacklists is that the minute anyone points out that
there are a lot that are causing serious problems there is a move to
immediately circle the wagons and deny everything.
Blacklists are inherently a censorship mechanism. Censoring spam senders is
good, nobody believes people have a right to speak to anyone who does not
want to listen. But it is still censorship and carries the risks of
censorship. It does not give me warm fuzzy feelings when I see people
playing with fire and get told, no they are not playing with fire, they are
handling chemicals in the process of oxidation.
As I say in the conclusion there can be a role for blacklists, but we have
to recognize that they are far from being a satisfactory solution, not least
because any process which requires large numbers of people to administer
systems according to subjective criteria is not satisfactory.
Phill
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg