[anti-abuse-wg] Spam FAQs need revision, was 2011-06 New Policy

+1

On 19 Dec 2011, at 14:32, Thor Kottelin wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net [mailto:anti-abuse-wg-
>> bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of russ at consumer.net
>> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 4:17 PM
>> To: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net
> 
>> I
>> tried to respond to an e-mail from the network you ran and it was
>> blocked.  Your abuse desk told me other people on my netblock were
>> spammers and I was supposed to go to my hosting provider and
>> somehow
>> make it stop.    I had no idea (or power) to do anything about it
>> and I
>> had no idea what anyone else on the netblock was doing.  When I ask
>> for
>> proof of the claims you never sent anything or explained further
>> (although you did unblock me).  These are some of the crazy stunts
>> pulled by abuse departments that has no basis in law or common
>> sense.
> 
> A network accepting mail from another network is extending the latter a 
> privilege. It is extremely common sense to block networks from which spam or 
> other abuse is detected. If you really would like to argue that such 
> blocking is illegal, the burden of proof is on you.
> 
> -- 
> Thor Kottelin
> http://www.anta.net/
> 
> 
> 

Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions ♞
Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
ICANN Accredited Registrar
http://www.blacknight.com/
http://blog.blacknight.com/
http://blacknight.biz
http://mneylon.tel
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
US: 213-233-1612 
UK: 0844 484 9361
Locall: 1850 929 929
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Facebook: http://fb.me/blacknight
Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845