Re: why our server got listed?

Oleg Bulyzhin wrote...

> rfc3552 has status 'best current practice', compare it to 'standard'
> for rfc821. Moreover, rfc3552 _does not_ refute rfc821 or 2821. It just
> explaining smtp design flaws and describing methods to make it better.
>
> I understand that rfc-like DSNs can be abused. But we have no any newer 
> smtp
> standard.

It appears to me that everyone is doing something that they are convinced
that they are allowed to do.

You are following an RFC that tells you to send spam.  You are allowed to do
that by the RFC, but you are not immune from this basic fact of life: 
Actions
Have Consequences.  Your choice to send email to people who never emailed
you has the consequence of pretty much everyone on the Internet treating you
like the spammer that you are.  As much as we all would like to live in a
world where we are immune to any undesired consequences, this is not that
world, and we all have to live with the consequences of our actions.

SpamCop is placing the IP addresses that you use to send spam (that the RFC
said you can send) in a database of IP addresses that meet certain criteria.
You can't claim that Spamcop isn't allowed to do that; anybody can put 
anything
they wish into their own database.  Spamcop isn't immune to the basic fact 
of
life that Actions Have Consequences either.  I note two consequences as 
being
particularly interesting; first, I pay Spamcop (I am a customer and I donate
beyond what I pay for the service).  That's because I approve of what 
Spamcop
is doing.  Second, you complain and your complaints get ignored. That's 
because
you do not approve of what Spamcop is doing.  You have a right to complain,
Spamcop has a right to ignore your complaints, and I have a right to send
money to Spamcop and to give my own not-affiliated-with-spamcop answer to
your complaint.

I, among many others on the Internet, have configured my email system to
accept then silently delete any email from any of the IP addresses listed
in the Spamcop database -- including yours.  You can't claim that I am not
allowed to do that; anybody can refuse to read any emails that they don't
want to read and I don't want to read anything from known spammers such as
yourself.

Now that we have dealt with what we each are allowed to do, let's look at
the matter of politeness; polite people don't do things that inconvenience
others without having a good reason to do so -- even if they are allowed to.

You no doubt feel that you are inconvenienced by me and others like me
blocking your emails.  I feel that I am inconvenienced by you and others
like you who send me spam.  I have a very good reason for rejecting your
spam emails; they are part of a flood of emails from you and other spammers
that, if not filtered out, would make my email system unusable.  As far as
I can tell you do not have a good reason to send your spam emails to people
who have never emailed you.  So the principle of politeness demands that you
be the one who changes his behavior.

IHTH.

G.M.