<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>I feel the same. You cannot be neutral if you charge for a
delisting. Moreover it's obvious that the charging for delisting
is there business modell.</p>
<p>89CHF (about 80€) for a single ip in Level-1?! 249CHF Level-2 and
449CHF Level-3. Sorry Esa, that's not a small fee. And even if
they would charge a fee, it's not ok. If we all agree with it it
would open the door for more and more blacklists to establish such
a model. I think everyone can imagine that your ip will be listed
rather sooner than later because they make money in such a way. So
you cannot be a neutral blacklist and nobody should accept and
better, use, such blacklists. <br>
</p>
<p>I understand that the widget should give an overview about
listings but it doesn't make sense with just two lists and
moreover one of them is UCEPROTECT. If you want to be a neutral
player you should extend the widget (more sth like MXToolbox). If
it's not possible the widget should be set aside because you give
UCEPROTECT a false legimacy (even if you don't want that).<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 05.03.21 um 13:25 schrieb Cynthia
Revström via anti-abuse-wg:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKw1M3Mrs3b2kXYbEKK=ax2GkrX4bv7gwtXu23r=+PRTQMHXWg@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="auto">
<div>I personally feel like it's impossible to have a neutral
list if you charge for delisting.
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Regardless of what might be the best solution,
I feel like there is no way* to do this that isn't subject
to abuse.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Like if your business model is getting fees
for delist requests, it's going to be close to impossible to
keep it neutral.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">* Within reason, like you come up with ideas
as proof of donation to a charity if you want to have a
filter against people spamming. But that will always have
some issues too.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">-Cynthia</div>
<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Mar 5, 2021, 11:59
Esa Laitinen <<a href="mailto:esa@laitinen.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">esa@laitinen.org</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi!<br>
<br>
Let me start saying that it seems to me that UCEPROTECT
doesn't follow<br>
their own stated policies. If it is so, it is a bad list.
But I'd like<br>
to discuss a principle here which I think I'd like to know
opinions of.<br>
<br>
On 05.03.21 11:38, Cynthia Revström via anti-abuse-wg
wrote:<br>
> As others have pointed out, even purely on a
technical level, they are<br>
> not any kind of trustworthy source as paying to be
delisted creates a<br>
> very bad incentive for them.<br>
<br>
We have a situation where your IP address has landed in a
DNSBL as<br>
collateral damage. You're hosted in the same subnet with a
spammer, for<br>
example, so it is an escalation listing.<br>
<br>
Which one is preferable?<br>
<br>
1. no chance of whitelisting your IP (as is the case with
SORBS, and I<br>
think many other DNSBL operators), so you either need to
move out, or<br>
convince the hosting provider to fix the issue<br>
<br>
2. you can get a whitelisting done (possibly for a
(relatively small) fee).<br>
<br>
Personally I'd prefer to have an option of 2. Having a
small fee would<br>
motivate me to talk with the hosting provider first, to
get their act<br>
together.<br>
<br>
<br>
Let's forget how UCEPROTECT is messing up, let's discuss
this as a<br>
principle.<br>
<br>
<br>
Yours,<br>
<br>
<br>
esa<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Mr Esa Laitinen<br>
IM: <a href="https://threema.id/2JP4Y33R" rel="noreferrer
noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://threema.id/2JP4Y33R</a>
or <a href="https://signal.org/install" rel="noreferrer
noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://signal.org/install</a><br>
Skype: reunaesa<br>
Mobile: +4178 838 57 77<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Mit freundlichem Gruß
Artfiles New Media GmbH
Andreas Worbs
Artfiles New Media GmbH | Zirkusweg 1 | 20359 Hamburg
Tel: 040 - 32 02 72 90 | Fax: 040 - 32 02 72 95
E-Mail: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:support@artfiles.de">support@artfiles.de</a> | Web: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.artfiles.de">http://www.artfiles.de</a>
Geschäftsführer: Harald Oltmanns | Tim Evers
Eingetragen im Handelsregister Hamburg - HRB 81478
</pre>
</body>
</html>