-----Original Message-----
From: owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com]On Behalf Of John
Glube
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 9:16 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: RE: [spf-discuss] FTC: we need sender authentication before "Do
Not Spam" can work
snip
"People use them [black lists] because they block
spam and very little, if any, legitimate mail."
Unfortunately, this is not correct:
"SpamCop runs a "blacklist" that is highly
controversial and has proven to be very
unreliable. There are frequent reports of
SpamCop's blacklist erroneously listing confirmed
opt-in email as spam! For these reasons, CAUCE
does not recommend use of the SpamCop blacklist.)"
http://www.cauce.org/about/resources.shtml
Well, that's one organization's opinion. YMMV. I've found the SpamCop
blacklist VERY useful. It is the one I rely on the most of those available
to me. I am signed up for opt-in mail and don't see a problem with it being
blocked (I at least run through subject lines before I dump the spam).
I also get a LOT of spam from organizations that claim I opted in, when I
know for a fact I haven't. The beauty of having all these blacklists with
different policies and standards is we can all pick and choose and find what
works for us. That's also one thing I really like about SPF too. I tell
you what I think is permitted and you decide what to do about it.
Scott K