Subject: Re: [Asrg] Fwd: How serious is uceprotect mail filtering ?

From: "Claus v. Wolfhausen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:33:33 +0100 (CET)

Dear Jose Marcio,

You wrote:
>Another one...
 
>Really uceprotect isn't something serious.

Really? I guess 2,5 Million happy users will have a different opinion on
that topic.
 
>As long as people managing your mail servers doesn't have enough
professional skills you should
>better go sell peanuts instead of managing a reputation list.

I made the decision that people which believe they have to register their
domains anonymous can not email me without being on my personal whitelist.
What has my personal decision to do with UCEPROTECT or with the
UCEPROTECT-DNSBL's?

Reagrds

Claus von Wolfhausen
Technical Director
UCEPROTECT-Network
http://www.uceprotect.net

---

From: Esa Laitinen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 20:54:33 +0100

> What has my personal decision to do with UCEPROTECT or with the
I think Jose Marcio doesn't agree the idea "my server, my rules".

Anyway, the domain he uses is hardly anonymous.

Yours,

esa

ps: Jose Marcio: why on earth would you CC somebody when responding to the
list?

-- 
Mr. Esa Laitinen
Tel. +41 76 200 2870
skype/yahoo: reunaesa
Blog: http://happiloppuuahistaa.blogspot.com

---

From: Jose-Marcio Martins da Cruz <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 21:29:15 +0100

Hi,

Esa Laitinen wrote:

> I think Jose Marcio doesn't agree the idea "my server, my rules".

Yes and no. At first, I misunderstood and though my message was rejected by their server using 
blacklist, not a personal rule.

Sure, anyone has the right to define what he's wanting to accept...

But this is another issue. Spam is a problem and, IMHO, it can be really hard when people use rules 
which aren't really related to spam filtering.

Imagine a non IT user sending a message being rejected on the other side by this kind of rule. 
Sometimes it's hard to explain him that the problem is the trivial rule used by the other side and 
not our system.

> ps: Jose Marcio: why on earth would you CC somebody when responding to
> the list?

It was a "reply all" which is a common practice (bad or not, one can think) on some other mailing 
lists I subscribe which sets the "replyto" header to the sender.