[anti-abuse-wg] Abuse: Too big to fail

If I do actually look at the abuse lists that list the spammer, Twitter
- they are sorbs, etc and have a reputation for ethical behavior..

What is interesting is how you & michele defend the spammer

One has to wonder whether it is because the fact that Twitter is an
evil spammer hurts you guys personally? 

Or if you are products (have twitter etc) accounts and the truth hurts?

If you love the Twitter spammer that much, why do you not try to get the
spammer to change their evil ways? Instead of trying to make it about a
quarter of all the rbl's being useless, etc.

or just plain stupid and obviously false claims that Twitter never sends spam.

Andre

On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 14:53:07 +0000
Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 19/06/17, 8:20 PM, "anti-abuse-wg on behalf of ox"
> <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net on behalf of andre at ox.co.za> wrote:
> 
>     And, apart from the fact that 25% of all spam lists does in fact
> list Twitter as a spammer
> 
> Sturgeon’s law manifests itself all the time. eg: the number of weird
> and wonderful blocklists used by maybe two men and their dog, the
> population of cranks on the Internet…
> 
> --srs
>