Actually I got a response quickly from a list member who represent sorbs at some level. Do you really think opinion has a place in mail delivery? What if the USPS decided any magazine you subscribed to was suddenly unfit for delivery and decided it should blocked (thrown away)? /m Robert Bonomi wrote:
From owner-nanog@merit.edu Tue Mar 15 11:59:40 2005 Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 09:59:21 -0800 From: Micah McNelly <micah@style.net> To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: sorbs.net
Nanog,
Anyone on the list involved with this project? I need to speak to someone ASAP. No, I am not going to pay your ridiculous fine.
SORBS is a one-man operation out of Australia.
I really doubt that he participates in the NORTH AMERICAN network operators group.
SORBS -- like _any_ other blocklist -- is simply an expression of opinion. if you feel that "somebody" is 'wrongly' blocking mail because of a SORBS listing, your _first_ step should be to contact *that* party, and request that either (a) they stop using SORBS, or (b) that they 'whitelist' you. *THEY* are the ones that made the decision to block your mail to their system.
Contact means for SORBS *is* provided on the web-site. it works reliably. Be advised, however, that a 'need' on your part does not translate to urgency on the part of anyone else.
Note: *Nobody*, not even SORBS, says you 'have to' make that charitable contribution. All the 'spam' listings _do_ "age off" the SORBS system, eventually.
Caveat: I have nothing to do with SORBS. I don't use it -- or *any* blocklist, for that matter -- myself (I use other means that are better suited for _my_ requirements). I don't even know the operator thereof. Everything I've said is based on published and publicly available information.
-- /m "I bet the human brain is a kludge." - Marvin Minsky