[SpamCop-List] Re: Why not allow bounces? They are required by RFC822!

[N. Miller]

On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 10:51:56 -0800, cb wrote:

> Mike Easter wrote:

>> Mike Easter wrote:

>>> the majority of blocklisting
>>> systems don't automatically delist.  Consider spamcop's temporary
>>> listing to be an aid or insight into a problem which you need to fix.

>> Of the hundreds of other blocklists, I don't know of any offhand which
>> automatically delist.

> Perhaps they have to due to the incidence of false positives.

I doubt it. Although I don't reject email on an SCBL listing, because of
"false positives", what counts as a "false positive" is perspective
dependent. What I consider a "false positive" is an email tagged as spam,
which isn't spam. What SpamCop would consider a "false positive", is a
sever listed for abuse which was not abusive.

What that means is that email from an abusive server will be tagged by my
MTA, using the SCBL, whether I consider it spam, or not.

-- 
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum