[RFCI-Discuss] plus.net postmaster listing rejected?

[Derek J. Balling]

On Oct 28, 2006, at 3:42 AM, Simon Arlott wrote:

> Why was this rejected: http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/tools/detail.php? 
> domain=plus.net&submitted=1161424422&table=postmaster
> While this entry exists: http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/tools/ 
> detail.php?domain=plus.net&submitted=1160412325&table=abuse ?

At the abstract layer, one has to first recognize that they're using  
an A/V program to do A/S work. (It's reporting that it's a "Phishing"  
virus, e.g., that it's spam.)   So let's not get accidentally caught  
up in using the "Virus" term too much.

So, the mail to postmaster was blocked because "it looks like  
phishing spam", a narrow criteria that is considered acceptable under  
the listing policy. Thus, that was a valid rejection, and the  
submission was dismissed.

The mail to abuse, though, says "We're rejecting your message to  
abuse because it looks like it contains spam," which is an absurd  
argument to make because the abuse@ address is designed for reporting  
of spam [and other abuses]. Rejecting a mail to abuse "because it  
looks like it has spam in it" defeats the purpose of the abuse@  
address, and is considered a listable offense under the published  
listing policies.

Hope that clears it up.

Cheers,
D


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2419 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.megacity.org/pipermail/rfci-discuss/attachments/20061028/24a7a55b/smime.bin