[Nottingham] Tux Games Antispam - Your message is being held

ForkBombFluf fluf at freeshell.org
Mon Dec 10 17:53:49 GMT 2007

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007, Andy Smith wrote:

> Hi Duncan,
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 03:30:31PM +0000, Duncan John Fyfe wrote:
>> Someone being abusive to Michael for making a choice they disagree with
>> (or for any other unreason) does nothing but harm.  As Michael (Leuty)
>> indicates, such incidents seriously damage us as a LUG because they give
>> us a bad reputation for abusive behaviour and shit like that sticks far
>> more than the many times people have asked for and received good,
>> friendly advice.
> But expecting the world to do your antispam work for you and not
> giving a toss when your software backscatters onto uninvolved
> parties is something that should be allowed to pass unchallenged?

If he doesn't give a toss, why would he even bother responding with his 
reasoning for using it as he did?  Best of luck gettng any sort of 
thought-out reply from a spammer.

>> No matter what you think about C/R systems; Michael (Simms) has *chosen*
>> a solution which works *for him* and I have no doubt he will continue to
>> use it until he is convinced that his C/R system is doing more harm than
>> good *to him*.
> Have you ever heard the phrase "think globally, act locally"?  On
> the Internet you *cannot* just do "what works for you", because we
> have to interoperate.

Maybe you should consider pushing this ideal with someone more deserving, 
the likes of Microsoft and their Internet Explorer 7 development team 
spring to mind.

Think globally act locally may be a good virtue in some instances 
(encouraging recycling perhaps), but the idea all too often seems to have 
become an excuse to abuse or vent frustationon on somone/something that is 
far easier to pick on than tackling the source of the deeper entrenched 
problem.  Sometimes acting locally really is nothing more than 
treading water and staring flame wars.

I really am continually amazed by how much bitterness and idealism this 
topic seems to tow behind it.

>> To convince someone like Michael (Simms) to move away from a C/R system
>> (or away from windows, outlook or any other "bad" system) someone is
>> going to have to be able to demonstrate an alternative (better) system
>> that solves *their* problem - not the problem you think they have.
> He wrote it!  If he did that and then watched it backfire onto the
> list, and presumably watches his logs as it sends out crap to people
> who never even contacted him and *still* isn't going to change his
> view then what real hope is there?

As he pointed out, it works well in a majority of cases, and he is looking 
at why it hasn't worked in this instance, ostensibly with the aim of 
fixing it. (Although a "sorry" instead of "I'm not going to apologize" 
might have been received a bit better!)

>> Then you need to convince them why your alternative is better

Here here!  A voice of reason.

> There is so much material out there now, as well as common sense, as
> to why C/R is bad, that anyone with an open mind cannot fail to be
> convinced.
> If however one is willing to be selfish and abusive then C/R is
> almost ideal.

Your opinion has been noted.  Beating a penguin over and over with a stick 
will not change his mind to your way of thinking, only cause him to be 
wary of people with sticks.  Please, can you either approach the matter in 
a more academic and helpful way that doesn't involve ad hominmen attacks 
or (better yet)) move on?


More information about the Nottingham mailing list