list mummies: lists.ubuntu.com is blacklisted
ajp at princeswalk.fsnet.co.uk
Tue Jul 27 12:28:22 UTC 2010
On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 20:46 +1000, Res wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jul 2010, NoOp wrote:
> > But, but... I'm going to sue! :-)
> that's OK, the courts here have already ruled its a case of "tough shit"
> if your blocked by a blacklist, and if you're the recipient, also tough
> luck :)
> > True, I should have thought of that... duh. It must be 5 o'clock
> > somewhere - time to switch from coffee to scotch. :-)
> it's now 20:45 so I'll drink to that :P
> "What does Windows have that Linux doesn't?" - One hell of a lot of bugs!
Well it looks like SORBS has chlorine.canonical.com listed, but no-one
SORBS entry is
Record Created:Sun Jul 25 00:51:19 2010
GMTRecord Updated:Sun Jul 25 00:51:19 2010
GMTAdditional Information:[ Submitted via: Report 'o Matic ] Received:
from chlorine.canonical.com (chlorine.canonical.com [188.8.131.52]) by
banshee.isux.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E6E0108BFC for <[email]>; Sun,
25 Jul 2010 00:53:55 +0000 (UTC)
Currently active and flagged to be published in DNS
If you wish to request a delisting please do so through the Support
Eligible for self delisting as only one spam occurance is recorded
So someone (the list owner?) could request de-listing. My recollection
of black-listing is that de-listing is easily done if you are not
continually spamming, but if you de-list, then spam again, and keep
doing this, then de-listing get progressively harder.
I used to report a lot of spam through SpamCop at one time, but nowadays
my ISP does a through job of filtering spam (and probably a few
legitimate emails as well).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the ubuntu-users