<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_24_0013215</id>
	<title>The Imminent Demise of SORBS</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1245847620000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader lets us know about the <a href="http://www.sorbs.net/">dire straits the SORBS anti-spam blacklist finds itself in</a>. According to a notice posted on the top page, long-time host the University of Queensland has "decided not to honor their agreement with... SORBS and terminate the hosting contract." The post, signed "Michelle Sullivan (Previously known as Matthew Sullivan)," says that the project needs either to "find alternative hosting for a 42RU rack in the Brisbane area of Queensland Australia" or to find a buyer. Offers are solicited for the assets of SORBS as an ongoing anti-spam service &mdash; it's now handling over 30 billion DNS queries per day. An update to the post says "A number of offers have already been made, we are evaluating each on their own merits." Failing a successful resolution, SORBS will cease operations on July 20, 2009 at 12 noon Brisbane time. Such a shutdown could slow or disrupt anti-spam efforts for large numbers of mail hosts worldwide.</htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader lets us know about the dire straits the SORBS anti-spam blacklist finds itself in .
According to a notice posted on the top page , long-time host the University of Queensland has " decided not to honor their agreement with... SORBS and terminate the hosting contract .
" The post , signed " Michelle Sullivan ( Previously known as Matthew Sullivan ) , " says that the project needs either to " find alternative hosting for a 42RU rack in the Brisbane area of Queensland Australia " or to find a buyer .
Offers are solicited for the assets of SORBS as an ongoing anti-spam service    it 's now handling over 30 billion DNS queries per day .
An update to the post says " A number of offers have already been made , we are evaluating each on their own merits .
" Failing a successful resolution , SORBS will cease operations on July 20 , 2009 at 12 noon Brisbane time .
Such a shutdown could slow or disrupt anti-spam efforts for large numbers of mail hosts worldwide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader lets us know about the dire straits the SORBS anti-spam blacklist finds itself in.
According to a notice posted on the top page, long-time host the University of Queensland has "decided not to honor their agreement with... SORBS and terminate the hosting contract.
" The post, signed "Michelle Sullivan (Previously known as Matthew Sullivan)," says that the project needs either to "find alternative hosting for a 42RU rack in the Brisbane area of Queensland Australia" or to find a buyer.
Offers are solicited for the assets of SORBS as an ongoing anti-spam service — it's now handling over 30 billion DNS queries per day.
An update to the post says "A number of offers have already been made, we are evaluating each on their own merits.
" Failing a successful resolution, SORBS will cease operations on July 20, 2009 at 12 noon Brisbane time.
Such a shutdown could slow or disrupt anti-spam efforts for large numbers of mail hosts worldwide.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449547</id>
	<title>Couldn't happen to a better bunch.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245784020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FREAKING GOOD RIDDANCE.</p><p>Sorbs put my company on their blacklist once, and it took me MONTHS to get us off.  Meanwhile I logged a half a dozen incidents a day, where mail servers refused mail from us because we were on SORBS.  These were real business communications- some potential clients, and some existing clients who needed tech support.</p><p>We hadn't sent any spam.  We had static IPs.  What was our sin?  I set our Reverse DNS TTL down too low for SORBs liking- for a week, because I was transitioning our internet connectivity.  In that week, Sorbs checked our DNS records, decided they didnt like them, and put us on their list.  Even after they went back to normal, SORBS never fucking responded to any form of contact from either us, or our ISP- Telepacific.</p><p>I hope SORBS and it's administrators rot in hell.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FREAKING GOOD RIDDANCE.Sorbs put my company on their blacklist once , and it took me MONTHS to get us off .
Meanwhile I logged a half a dozen incidents a day , where mail servers refused mail from us because we were on SORBS .
These were real business communications- some potential clients , and some existing clients who needed tech support.We had n't sent any spam .
We had static IPs .
What was our sin ?
I set our Reverse DNS TTL down too low for SORBs liking- for a week , because I was transitioning our internet connectivity .
In that week , Sorbs checked our DNS records , decided they didnt like them , and put us on their list .
Even after they went back to normal , SORBS never fucking responded to any form of contact from either us , or our ISP- Telepacific.I hope SORBS and it 's administrators rot in hell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FREAKING GOOD RIDDANCE.Sorbs put my company on their blacklist once, and it took me MONTHS to get us off.
Meanwhile I logged a half a dozen incidents a day, where mail servers refused mail from us because we were on SORBS.
These were real business communications- some potential clients, and some existing clients who needed tech support.We hadn't sent any spam.
We had static IPs.
What was our sin?
I set our Reverse DNS TTL down too low for SORBs liking- for a week, because I was transitioning our internet connectivity.
In that week, Sorbs checked our DNS records, decided they didnt like them, and put us on their list.
Even after they went back to normal, SORBS never fucking responded to any form of contact from either us, or our ISP- Telepacific.I hope SORBS and it's administrators rot in hell.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449741</id>
	<title>Re:Death to SORBS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245785940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I run an ISP in the midwest. SORBS has caused so many problems, I don't want to bore you all with them here. I briefly talked  with Mr(s?) Sullivan via email back in 07 about several problems he caused by blocking subnets we had on both Nuvox and XO. His response to my email (which was long but detailed), I paster here for brevity:</p><p>---------snip---------<br>F\_ck off.</p><p>Yours trully,<br>ms<br>---------snip---------</p><p>Hopefully, she/he takes up dancing at a crossdress clubs and stays the \_hell\_ off the internet.</p></div><p>ROFL!  What a load of rubbish.</p><p>To the OP - post the SORBS ticket number where you received that response, and I'll post the entire ticket contents here...!</p><p>Matthew/Michelle never signed a message as 'ms' and never used 'your trully' either, so you're full of BS!</p><p>A SORBS Volunteer</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I run an ISP in the midwest .
SORBS has caused so many problems , I do n't want to bore you all with them here .
I briefly talked with Mr ( s ?
) Sullivan via email back in 07 about several problems he caused by blocking subnets we had on both Nuvox and XO .
His response to my email ( which was long but detailed ) , I paster here for brevity : ---------snip---------F \ _ck off.Yours trully,ms---------snip---------Hopefully , she/he takes up dancing at a crossdress clubs and stays the \ _hell \ _ off the internet.ROFL !
What a load of rubbish.To the OP - post the SORBS ticket number where you received that response , and I 'll post the entire ticket contents here... ! Matthew/Michelle never signed a message as 'ms ' and never used 'your trully ' either , so you 're full of BS ! A SORBS Volunteer</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I run an ISP in the midwest.
SORBS has caused so many problems, I don't want to bore you all with them here.
I briefly talked  with Mr(s?
) Sullivan via email back in 07 about several problems he caused by blocking subnets we had on both Nuvox and XO.
His response to my email (which was long but detailed), I paster here for brevity:---------snip---------F\_ck off.Yours trully,ms---------snip---------Hopefully, she/he takes up dancing at a crossdress clubs and stays the \_hell\_ off the internet.ROFL!
What a load of rubbish.To the OP - post the SORBS ticket number where you received that response, and I'll post the entire ticket contents here...!Matthew/Michelle never signed a message as 'ms' and never used 'your trully' either, so you're full of BS!A SORBS Volunteer
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451727</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>MikeBabcock</author>
	<datestamp>1245854700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The known dial-up ranges are a problem, and a stupid way to block spam.</p><p>I have several business mail servers running on static IP ranges from DSL providers that regularly run into "why are they blocking my mail?" issues because of this.  Until the ISPs agree on a way to publish "should" and "should not" lists for their users' services, the Internet should be considered the Internet with arbitrary range blocking avoided.</p><p>IMHO it wouldn't be hard for ISPs to use a reverse-DNS range for specifying users who have business/static IP accounts for checking purposes, but its not being done to my knowledge.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The known dial-up ranges are a problem , and a stupid way to block spam.I have several business mail servers running on static IP ranges from DSL providers that regularly run into " why are they blocking my mail ?
" issues because of this .
Until the ISPs agree on a way to publish " should " and " should not " lists for their users ' services , the Internet should be considered the Internet with arbitrary range blocking avoided.IMHO it would n't be hard for ISPs to use a reverse-DNS range for specifying users who have business/static IP accounts for checking purposes , but its not being done to my knowledge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The known dial-up ranges are a problem, and a stupid way to block spam.I have several business mail servers running on static IP ranges from DSL providers that regularly run into "why are they blocking my mail?
" issues because of this.
Until the ISPs agree on a way to publish "should" and "should not" lists for their users' services, the Internet should be considered the Internet with arbitrary range blocking avoided.IMHO it wouldn't be hard for ISPs to use a reverse-DNS range for specifying users who have business/static IP accounts for checking purposes, but its not being done to my knowledge.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447965</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448543</id>
	<title>Good!</title>
	<author>jidar</author>
	<datestamp>1245772740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The death of SORBS should be good news to any decent ISP mail admin out there. Nothing like being forced to pay to get your mail server IP removed from a blacklist because you somehow can't keep the thousands of residential customers on your service from occasionally getting a virus and sending a few spams.<br>SORBS sucks and has for years. Don't get me wrong, I hate spam as much as the next guy, but sometimes a few get through, that's just how it is.<br>Luckily we haven't had much trouble with them lately since it seems that the vast majority of mail admins came to their senses and stopped using SORBS... frankly I'm surprised they need that many servers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The death of SORBS should be good news to any decent ISP mail admin out there .
Nothing like being forced to pay to get your mail server IP removed from a blacklist because you somehow ca n't keep the thousands of residential customers on your service from occasionally getting a virus and sending a few spams.SORBS sucks and has for years .
Do n't get me wrong , I hate spam as much as the next guy , but sometimes a few get through , that 's just how it is.Luckily we have n't had much trouble with them lately since it seems that the vast majority of mail admins came to their senses and stopped using SORBS... frankly I 'm surprised they need that many servers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The death of SORBS should be good news to any decent ISP mail admin out there.
Nothing like being forced to pay to get your mail server IP removed from a blacklist because you somehow can't keep the thousands of residential customers on your service from occasionally getting a virus and sending a few spams.SORBS sucks and has for years.
Don't get me wrong, I hate spam as much as the next guy, but sometimes a few get through, that's just how it is.Luckily we haven't had much trouble with them lately since it seems that the vast majority of mail admins came to their senses and stopped using SORBS... frankly I'm surprised they need that many servers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448825</id>
	<title>SORBS is a failure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245775620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Completely ridiculous that you need to pay to get your IP removed from there. If you run your own mail server or whatever and someone gets a virus and some spam is sent out without them knowing then having your IP blacklisted is just stupid, and then having to pay to get it removed it even worse.</p><p>http://antimatter.atbhost.net/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Completely ridiculous that you need to pay to get your IP removed from there .
If you run your own mail server or whatever and someone gets a virus and some spam is sent out without them knowing then having your IP blacklisted is just stupid , and then having to pay to get it removed it even worse.http : //antimatter.atbhost.net/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Completely ridiculous that you need to pay to get your IP removed from there.
If you run your own mail server or whatever and someone gets a virus and some spam is sent out without them knowing then having your IP blacklisted is just stupid, and then having to pay to get it removed it even worse.http://antimatter.atbhost.net/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448033</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>Zontar\_Thing\_From\_Ve</author>
	<datestamp>1245766860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You're kidding, right?</p><p>They have done more to give legitimate anti-spam efforts a black eye than ANY legislative attempts to 'solve' the problem ever could.</p><p>I -used- to believe that 'collateral damage' was a legitimate 'tactic' in the fight against spammers. I've grown up since then.</p></div><p>You get a big high five from me on that.  On my previous job, SORBS caused us a <b> lot </b> of problems.  It was very difficult to get off their lists once they listed you and if I remember correctly they also had a policy of not telling you why you were listed to begin with.  I remember that one of the guys in our main European office was able to make friends with one of the SORBS guys in the same country and get some information about why we were blacklisted.  Normally they didn't tell you why you were blacklisted, but this was some "countryman to countryman" special favor this SORBS guy did for us.  We had a lot of email problems because some customers would use only SORBS for dealing with spam so if you're on the list, your email doesn't go through to them.  I'm not saying that SORBS couldn't have been a useful minor part of an anti-spam solution, but all I saw was customers who blindly trusted SORBS and only SORBS and that made our life hell.  I agree that I no longer think that SORBS' collection of tactics is legitimate.  There are better ways to deal with spam and if SORBS dies, well, sign me up to dance on their grave.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're kidding , right ? They have done more to give legitimate anti-spam efforts a black eye than ANY legislative attempts to 'solve ' the problem ever could.I -used- to believe that 'collateral damage ' was a legitimate 'tactic ' in the fight against spammers .
I 've grown up since then.You get a big high five from me on that .
On my previous job , SORBS caused us a lot of problems .
It was very difficult to get off their lists once they listed you and if I remember correctly they also had a policy of not telling you why you were listed to begin with .
I remember that one of the guys in our main European office was able to make friends with one of the SORBS guys in the same country and get some information about why we were blacklisted .
Normally they did n't tell you why you were blacklisted , but this was some " countryman to countryman " special favor this SORBS guy did for us .
We had a lot of email problems because some customers would use only SORBS for dealing with spam so if you 're on the list , your email does n't go through to them .
I 'm not saying that SORBS could n't have been a useful minor part of an anti-spam solution , but all I saw was customers who blindly trusted SORBS and only SORBS and that made our life hell .
I agree that I no longer think that SORBS ' collection of tactics is legitimate .
There are better ways to deal with spam and if SORBS dies , well , sign me up to dance on their grave .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're kidding, right?They have done more to give legitimate anti-spam efforts a black eye than ANY legislative attempts to 'solve' the problem ever could.I -used- to believe that 'collateral damage' was a legitimate 'tactic' in the fight against spammers.
I've grown up since then.You get a big high five from me on that.
On my previous job, SORBS caused us a  lot  of problems.
It was very difficult to get off their lists once they listed you and if I remember correctly they also had a policy of not telling you why you were listed to begin with.
I remember that one of the guys in our main European office was able to make friends with one of the SORBS guys in the same country and get some information about why we were blacklisted.
Normally they didn't tell you why you were blacklisted, but this was some "countryman to countryman" special favor this SORBS guy did for us.
We had a lot of email problems because some customers would use only SORBS for dealing with spam so if you're on the list, your email doesn't go through to them.
I'm not saying that SORBS couldn't have been a useful minor part of an anti-spam solution, but all I saw was customers who blindly trusted SORBS and only SORBS and that made our life hell.
I agree that I no longer think that SORBS' collection of tactics is legitimate.
There are better ways to deal with spam and if SORBS dies, well, sign me up to dance on their grave.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28463981</id>
	<title>Re:No big loss!</title>
	<author>hardwarefreak</author>
	<datestamp>1245922020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My brother's domain got randomly blacklisted, as did another business venture I'm involved with.</p></div><p>dnsbls are databases of IP addresses.  They do not contain domains (example.tld).  Thus, your brother's domain did not get black listed.  And, contrary to your ignorance, there is no 'randomness' to a block list entry.  Each IP address that goes into the database goes there for a very specific reason.  Usually the reason is spam sent to a spam trap address from said IP address.</p><p>Care to be specific around your actual circumstances.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My brother 's domain got randomly blacklisted , as did another business venture I 'm involved with.dnsbls are databases of IP addresses .
They do not contain domains ( example.tld ) .
Thus , your brother 's domain did not get black listed .
And , contrary to your ignorance , there is no 'randomness ' to a block list entry .
Each IP address that goes into the database goes there for a very specific reason .
Usually the reason is spam sent to a spam trap address from said IP address.Care to be specific around your actual circumstances .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My brother's domain got randomly blacklisted, as did another business venture I'm involved with.dnsbls are databases of IP addresses.
They do not contain domains (example.tld).
Thus, your brother's domain did not get black listed.
And, contrary to your ignorance, there is no 'randomness' to a block list entry.
Each IP address that goes into the database goes there for a very specific reason.
Usually the reason is spam sent to a spam trap address from said IP address.Care to be specific around your actual circumstances.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448559</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451455</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245852660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So why were you blacklisted?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So why were you blacklisted ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So why were you blacklisted?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448033</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448673</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>omnichad</author>
	<datestamp>1245774300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think blocking IP addresses just because they look dynamic is a good idea.  I tried to run a web server on a static (ok, sticky) IP address from a Pro AT&amp;T DSL account.  Just about half the blocklists still blocked the IP and some of them even denied delisting.  For a small server with low bandwidth requirements, should there really be a data center tax?  I, for one, don't like the Internet closing off into a pay-for-play system that spits on the open nature of the Internet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think blocking IP addresses just because they look dynamic is a good idea .
I tried to run a web server on a static ( ok , sticky ) IP address from a Pro AT&amp;T DSL account .
Just about half the blocklists still blocked the IP and some of them even denied delisting .
For a small server with low bandwidth requirements , should there really be a data center tax ?
I , for one , do n't like the Internet closing off into a pay-for-play system that spits on the open nature of the Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think blocking IP addresses just because they look dynamic is a good idea.
I tried to run a web server on a static (ok, sticky) IP address from a Pro AT&amp;T DSL account.
Just about half the blocklists still blocked the IP and some of them even denied delisting.
For a small server with low bandwidth requirements, should there really be a data center tax?
I, for one, don't like the Internet closing off into a pay-for-play system that spits on the open nature of the Internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447965</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449153</id>
	<title>AssHats!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245779340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah.... Sorbs Sucks may they suffer a quick agonizing death.  These clowns have held a couple of IP's hostage that they have "identified" as being spammers.  Of course they did this based on a single email sent over one year ago.  They don't even seem to have an expiry date on their blacklists.  Asshats.... and of course they want money.  Ten seconds of research would show that we are a legit ISP, of course I could understand a one week blacklist.  But years come on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah.... Sorbs Sucks may they suffer a quick agonizing death .
These clowns have held a couple of IP 's hostage that they have " identified " as being spammers .
Of course they did this based on a single email sent over one year ago .
They do n't even seem to have an expiry date on their blacklists .
Asshats.... and of course they want money .
Ten seconds of research would show that we are a legit ISP , of course I could understand a one week blacklist .
But years come on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah.... Sorbs Sucks may they suffer a quick agonizing death.
These clowns have held a couple of IP's hostage that they have "identified" as being spammers.
Of course they did this based on a single email sent over one year ago.
They don't even seem to have an expiry date on their blacklists.
Asshats.... and of course they want money.
Ten seconds of research would show that we are a legit ISP, of course I could understand a one week blacklist.
But years come on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451465</id>
	<title>Down with the SORBS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245852720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let them burn!</p><p>Some Old Rusty Blacklist Software</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let them burn ! Some Old Rusty Blacklist Software</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let them burn!Some Old Rusty Blacklist Software</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447965</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245766140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And before anyone starts to give me any guff about being soft on spam -</p><p>I've been known to nuke accounts, and not bother asking questions. I chased down the Empire Towers group and helped put an end to them. I spent 18 months cleaning up the -very- tarnished reputation of a now bought out web host almost 10 years ago, and have the scars to prove it.  I hunted a spammer down and ratted him out to his own mother in Vancouver, BC, Canada.</p><p>The news regarding Ralsky had me drop a shot in celebration.</p><p>Believe me - I -detest- spam. At the same time, the methods utilized by SORBS were ineffective, and most legitimate hosts and providers stopped using them years ago.</p><p>Selective DNSRBL systems, as a practical method, WORK. Blocking residential cable from sending email? Hella good idea, for example. Blocking known dial-up ranges, as well. Blocking webhosts in an attempt to get their customer base to force them into canceling contracts that may cost the web host hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars? Nuh-uh.</p><p>When 'collateral damage' was useful, losses MIGHT have hit 10k. Now? Talking millions? Businesses will buy a new IP block and move the affected customers, and call it a day. Especially if they're blocked not because a customer has been an idiot, per se, but because the customer was hacked and used as a bot.</p><p>So, yeah. Rock on with your bad selves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And before anyone starts to give me any guff about being soft on spam -I 've been known to nuke accounts , and not bother asking questions .
I chased down the Empire Towers group and helped put an end to them .
I spent 18 months cleaning up the -very- tarnished reputation of a now bought out web host almost 10 years ago , and have the scars to prove it .
I hunted a spammer down and ratted him out to his own mother in Vancouver , BC , Canada.The news regarding Ralsky had me drop a shot in celebration.Believe me - I -detest- spam .
At the same time , the methods utilized by SORBS were ineffective , and most legitimate hosts and providers stopped using them years ago.Selective DNSRBL systems , as a practical method , WORK .
Blocking residential cable from sending email ?
Hella good idea , for example .
Blocking known dial-up ranges , as well .
Blocking webhosts in an attempt to get their customer base to force them into canceling contracts that may cost the web host hundreds of thousands , if not millions of dollars ?
Nuh-uh.When 'collateral damage ' was useful , losses MIGHT have hit 10k .
Now ? Talking millions ?
Businesses will buy a new IP block and move the affected customers , and call it a day .
Especially if they 're blocked not because a customer has been an idiot , per se , but because the customer was hacked and used as a bot.So , yeah .
Rock on with your bad selves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And before anyone starts to give me any guff about being soft on spam -I've been known to nuke accounts, and not bother asking questions.
I chased down the Empire Towers group and helped put an end to them.
I spent 18 months cleaning up the -very- tarnished reputation of a now bought out web host almost 10 years ago, and have the scars to prove it.
I hunted a spammer down and ratted him out to his own mother in Vancouver, BC, Canada.The news regarding Ralsky had me drop a shot in celebration.Believe me - I -detest- spam.
At the same time, the methods utilized by SORBS were ineffective, and most legitimate hosts and providers stopped using them years ago.Selective DNSRBL systems, as a practical method, WORK.
Blocking residential cable from sending email?
Hella good idea, for example.
Blocking known dial-up ranges, as well.
Blocking webhosts in an attempt to get their customer base to force them into canceling contracts that may cost the web host hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars?
Nuh-uh.When 'collateral damage' was useful, losses MIGHT have hit 10k.
Now? Talking millions?
Businesses will buy a new IP block and move the affected customers, and call it a day.
Especially if they're blocked not because a customer has been an idiot, per se, but because the customer was hacked and used as a bot.So, yeah.
Rock on with your bad selves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449321</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>mortonda</author>
	<datestamp>1245781320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the case nowadays that blackhole lists ( or whatever they're called ) are used mainly as a factor in weighing scores in Bayesian methods of filtering spam, rather than just blocking email outright? In other words, the usage is still widespread, not for direct blocking, but for helping a program decide if its spam or not?</p></div><p>As paitre says, the smart people are... but it's not as clear cut as that. Some locations receive so much traffic they have to weed out some connections at the SMTP level.  This is usually done wish a conservative DNSBL,  and greylisting.   After that, messages can be subjected to a gauntlet of tests and the final answer based on the sum of those tests.  Some degree of SMTP level filtering at the front end saves a lot of resources on the backend scanning.</p><p>Disclaimer/plug: I am a developer of Maia Mailguard   (but the heavy lifting belongs to SpamAssassin)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Correct me if I 'm wrong , but is n't it the case nowadays that blackhole lists ( or whatever they 're called ) are used mainly as a factor in weighing scores in Bayesian methods of filtering spam , rather than just blocking email outright ?
In other words , the usage is still widespread , not for direct blocking , but for helping a program decide if its spam or not ? As paitre says , the smart people are... but it 's not as clear cut as that .
Some locations receive so much traffic they have to weed out some connections at the SMTP level .
This is usually done wish a conservative DNSBL , and greylisting .
After that , messages can be subjected to a gauntlet of tests and the final answer based on the sum of those tests .
Some degree of SMTP level filtering at the front end saves a lot of resources on the backend scanning.Disclaimer/plug : I am a developer of Maia Mailguard ( but the heavy lifting belongs to SpamAssassin )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the case nowadays that blackhole lists ( or whatever they're called ) are used mainly as a factor in weighing scores in Bayesian methods of filtering spam, rather than just blocking email outright?
In other words, the usage is still widespread, not for direct blocking, but for helping a program decide if its spam or not?As paitre says, the smart people are... but it's not as clear cut as that.
Some locations receive so much traffic they have to weed out some connections at the SMTP level.
This is usually done wish a conservative DNSBL,  and greylisting.
After that, messages can be subjected to a gauntlet of tests and the final answer based on the sum of those tests.
Some degree of SMTP level filtering at the front end saves a lot of resources on the backend scanning.Disclaimer/plug: I am a developer of Maia Mailguard   (but the heavy lifting belongs to SpamAssassin)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449167</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>Antique Geekmeister</author>
	<datestamp>1245779580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not much. It's computationally expensive to scan for blacklist based email, accept the deluges of it, and then process it. A small shop might not have the spare horsepower to do sophisticated processing, which takes some knowledge and some negotiation with your clients about how much to block accidentally versus how much to allow.</p><p>So SORBS' demise may slow some filtering that previously blocked it at the IP address. But there are at least half a dozen, more legitimate, less offensively capricious blackhole lists that will easily fill the void.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not much .
It 's computationally expensive to scan for blacklist based email , accept the deluges of it , and then process it .
A small shop might not have the spare horsepower to do sophisticated processing , which takes some knowledge and some negotiation with your clients about how much to block accidentally versus how much to allow.So SORBS ' demise may slow some filtering that previously blocked it at the IP address .
But there are at least half a dozen , more legitimate , less offensively capricious blackhole lists that will easily fill the void .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not much.
It's computationally expensive to scan for blacklist based email, accept the deluges of it, and then process it.
A small shop might not have the spare horsepower to do sophisticated processing, which takes some knowledge and some negotiation with your clients about how much to block accidentally versus how much to allow.So SORBS' demise may slow some filtering that previously blocked it at the IP address.
But there are at least half a dozen, more legitimate, less offensively capricious blackhole lists that will easily fill the void.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447959</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>LoadWB</author>
	<datestamp>1245766020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only bad thing about this is the loss of mirrors of GOOD lists it provides.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only bad thing about this is the loss of mirrors of GOOD lists it provides .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only bad thing about this is the loss of mirrors of GOOD lists it provides.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451371</id>
	<title>Your post contradicts itself</title>
	<author>coryking</author>
	<datestamp>1245852120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I use SORBS</p></div></blockquote><blockquote><div><p>[I am a] professional...</p></div></blockquote><p>Sorry buddy.  You aren't a pro if you use SORBS.  You are either ignorant, in which case you should read over this thread to learn or you are an asshole with a chip on your shoulder, in which case, well...  you are soooooo good looking!</p><p>Seriously, you can't claim to be a professional and use SORBS.  It is about the most unprofessional way to filter email ever.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use SORBS [ I am a ] professional...Sorry buddy .
You are n't a pro if you use SORBS .
You are either ignorant , in which case you should read over this thread to learn or you are an asshole with a chip on your shoulder , in which case , well... you are soooooo good looking ! Seriously , you ca n't claim to be a professional and use SORBS .
It is about the most unprofessional way to filter email ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use SORBS[I am a] professional...Sorry buddy.
You aren't a pro if you use SORBS.
You are either ignorant, in which case you should read over this thread to learn or you are an asshole with a chip on your shoulder, in which case, well...  you are soooooo good looking!Seriously, you can't claim to be a professional and use SORBS.
It is about the most unprofessional way to filter email ever.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448529</id>
	<title>Re:No big loss!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245772620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A blacklist that monitors open relays and proxies?</p><p>There, fixed that for ya.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A blacklist that monitors open relays and proxies ? There , fixed that for ya .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A blacklist that monitors open relays and proxies?There, fixed that for ya.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28452217</id>
	<title>Re:some good DNSBLs</title>
	<author>MikeBabcock</author>
	<datestamp>1245857460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've found the RBL lists that Spamcop hosts to be quite reliable.  They also have very good explanations of how and why sites are listed and are very cooperative in all my encounters with them.  Their very nice "report your spam" interface is also cool, and useful for keeping their information up to date.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've found the RBL lists that Spamcop hosts to be quite reliable .
They also have very good explanations of how and why sites are listed and are very cooperative in all my encounters with them .
Their very nice " report your spam " interface is also cool , and useful for keeping their information up to date .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've found the RBL lists that Spamcop hosts to be quite reliable.
They also have very good explanations of how and why sites are listed and are very cooperative in all my encounters with them.
Their very nice "report your spam" interface is also cool, and useful for keeping their information up to date.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448171</id>
	<title>Re:No big loss!</title>
	<author>CarpetShark</author>
	<datestamp>1245768240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>A blacklist that charges you to get your IP removed...</p></div></blockquote><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...is otherwise known as extortion.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A blacklist that charges you to get your IP removed... ...is otherwise known as extortion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A blacklist that charges you to get your IP removed... ...is otherwise known as extortion.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448833</id>
	<title>Re:No big loss!</title>
	<author>Cramer</author>
	<datestamp>1245775680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In their words, "it's not extortion as *we* don't see any of the money."  It's still bullshit.</p><p>I've had issue with them for many years... their "spamtrap" list is 100\% untrustable.  It only takes one email <i>EVER</i> to get on the list.  They provide zero evidence of how you got on the list, just that you are on it.  Enties never, ever, expire.  And to get off the list... you have to "make a donation." (But if you're google, you get removed without ever knowing you were listed.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In their words , " it 's not extortion as * we * do n't see any of the money .
" It 's still bullshit.I 've had issue with them for many years... their " spamtrap " list is 100 \ % untrustable .
It only takes one email EVER to get on the list .
They provide zero evidence of how you got on the list , just that you are on it .
Enties never , ever , expire .
And to get off the list... you have to " make a donation .
" ( But if you 're google , you get removed without ever knowing you were listed .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In their words, "it's not extortion as *we* don't see any of the money.
"  It's still bullshit.I've had issue with them for many years... their "spamtrap" list is 100\% untrustable.
It only takes one email EVER to get on the list.
They provide zero evidence of how you got on the list, just that you are on it.
Enties never, ever, expire.
And to get off the list... you have to "make a donation.
" (But if you're google, you get removed without ever knowing you were listed.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511</id>
	<title>Nothing's wrong with SORBS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245840660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use SORBS professionally. It works. It stops spam. The few times IP space from our customers got listed, they got delisted within 24 hours after contacting SORBS by e-mail. All it cost me was registering an account for my employer at SORBS.</p><p>As usual in the discussion on blocklisting, Slashdot is being overrun by, ehm, 'legitimate biznizmen' and their supporters, and people who know jack shit about blocklisting and its history, but believe those who shout the loudest.</p><p>
Mart</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use SORBS professionally .
It works .
It stops spam .
The few times IP space from our customers got listed , they got delisted within 24 hours after contacting SORBS by e-mail .
All it cost me was registering an account for my employer at SORBS.As usual in the discussion on blocklisting , Slashdot is being overrun by , ehm , 'legitimate biznizmen ' and their supporters , and people who know jack shit about blocklisting and its history , but believe those who shout the loudest .
Mart</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use SORBS professionally.
It works.
It stops spam.
The few times IP space from our customers got listed, they got delisted within 24 hours after contacting SORBS by e-mail.
All it cost me was registering an account for my employer at SORBS.As usual in the discussion on blocklisting, Slashdot is being overrun by, ehm, 'legitimate biznizmen' and their supporters, and people who know jack shit about blocklisting and its history, but believe those who shout the loudest.
Mart</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871</id>
	<title>*snort*</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245765300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Such a shutdown could slow or disrupt anti-spam efforts for large numbers of mail hosts worldwide. "</p><p>You're kidding, right?</p><p>They have done more to give legitimate anti-spam efforts a black eye than ANY legislative attempts to 'solve' the problem ever could.</p><p>I -used- to believe that 'collateral damage' was a legitimate 'tactic' in the fight against spammers. I've grown up since then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Such a shutdown could slow or disrupt anti-spam efforts for large numbers of mail hosts worldwide .
" You 're kidding , right ? They have done more to give legitimate anti-spam efforts a black eye than ANY legislative attempts to 'solve ' the problem ever could.I -used- to believe that 'collateral damage ' was a legitimate 'tactic ' in the fight against spammers .
I 've grown up since then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Such a shutdown could slow or disrupt anti-spam efforts for large numbers of mail hosts worldwide.
"You're kidding, right?They have done more to give legitimate anti-spam efforts a black eye than ANY legislative attempts to 'solve' the problem ever could.I -used- to believe that 'collateral damage' was a legitimate 'tactic' in the fight against spammers.
I've grown up since then.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28452783</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing's wrong with SORBS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245859980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Professional and SORBS should not exist in the same language.</p><p>I work for a major webhosting provider.  They've tried to ransom us time and again, and they have nothing but unethical business practices.</p><p>In short, they suck.  To the Gmail-mobile!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Professional and SORBS should not exist in the same language.I work for a major webhosting provider .
They 've tried to ransom us time and again , and they have nothing but unethical business practices.In short , they suck .
To the Gmail-mobile !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Professional and SORBS should not exist in the same language.I work for a major webhosting provider.
They've tried to ransom us time and again, and they have nothing but unethical business practices.In short, they suck.
To the Gmail-mobile!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448139</id>
	<title>The REAL story</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245767940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whoa, whoa, whoa!  Hold yer horses.  We're missing the REAL story here:</p><p>&gt;"Michelle Sullivan (Previously known as Matthew Sullivan),"</p><p>Who wants to chatter about some spam thing when there's dirt on a sex change??!?!?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whoa , whoa , whoa !
Hold yer horses .
We 're missing the REAL story here : &gt; " Michelle Sullivan ( Previously known as Matthew Sullivan ) , " Who wants to chatter about some spam thing when there 's dirt on a sex change ? ? ! ? ! ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whoa, whoa, whoa!
Hold yer horses.
We're missing the REAL story here:&gt;"Michelle Sullivan (Previously known as Matthew Sullivan),"Who wants to chatter about some spam thing when there's dirt on a sex change??!?!?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28454425</id>
	<title>Re:No big loss!</title>
	<author>Minwee</author>
	<datestamp>1245865680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having been on the pointy end of SORBS several times I can honestly say that I never had any trouble getting off of it.  I never had to pay any money, make any threats, or invoke demons from the lower planes to do it.
</p><p>Every single time all I had to do was go to their web page and follow the simple directions given for removing myself from the naughty mailers list.  No demands for small, unmarked bills were ever made and nobody ever tried to hassle me about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having been on the pointy end of SORBS several times I can honestly say that I never had any trouble getting off of it .
I never had to pay any money , make any threats , or invoke demons from the lower planes to do it .
Every single time all I had to do was go to their web page and follow the simple directions given for removing myself from the naughty mailers list .
No demands for small , unmarked bills were ever made and nobody ever tried to hassle me about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having been on the pointy end of SORBS several times I can honestly say that I never had any trouble getting off of it.
I never had to pay any money, make any threats, or invoke demons from the lower planes to do it.
Every single time all I had to do was go to their web page and follow the simple directions given for removing myself from the naughty mailers list.
No demands for small, unmarked bills were ever made and nobody ever tried to hassle me about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451673</id>
	<title>Good riddance!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245854400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As an admin at an ISP I usually cheer any efforts aimed at reducing spam volume, but I've come to hate SORBS over the years -- mostly because of the Dynamic Hosts list. If you can't do a thing well, you shouldn't do it at all. Pity it took so long for them to -- hopefully -- disappear and/or get replaced by someone more competent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As an admin at an ISP I usually cheer any efforts aimed at reducing spam volume , but I 've come to hate SORBS over the years -- mostly because of the Dynamic Hosts list .
If you ca n't do a thing well , you should n't do it at all .
Pity it took so long for them to -- hopefully -- disappear and/or get replaced by someone more competent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an admin at an ISP I usually cheer any efforts aimed at reducing spam volume, but I've come to hate SORBS over the years -- mostly because of the Dynamic Hosts list.
If you can't do a thing well, you shouldn't do it at all.
Pity it took so long for them to -- hopefully -- disappear and/or get replaced by someone more competent.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448247</id>
	<title>It's nice to see</title>
	<author>pyster</author>
	<datestamp>1245769140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Its nice to see that most of ppl here have finally come to terms with the fact sorbs is worthless. <br> <br>
The only thing that would make me happier is if those involved with sorbs became burn victims from trying to freebase jenkem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Its nice to see that most of ppl here have finally come to terms with the fact sorbs is worthless .
The only thing that would make me happier is if those involved with sorbs became burn victims from trying to freebase jenkem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its nice to see that most of ppl here have finally come to terms with the fact sorbs is worthless.
The only thing that would make me happier is if those involved with sorbs became burn victims from trying to freebase jenkem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28453553</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing's wrong with SORBS</title>
	<author>Kamamura</author>
	<datestamp>1245862740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is exactly the middle-management mentality that causes so much trouble: "Look, it works, it killed the fly. Oh, and it also killed the whole village..."</p><p>Maybe you would be better off plugging the network cable off - voila, stops spam 100\%. The problem is that blacklists like these create a lot of false positives - legitimate customers of other ISPs whose IPs and IP ranges got blacklisted can't mail to your clients. Not your problem? Wrong, it is your problem, because by applying the blacklist "solution" without proper consideration, you are punishing innocent people collectively (bad practice).</p><p>Imagine an ISP with outgoing mailserver for many ADSL users - many users today have compromised Windows instalations serving as zombies for spammers. ISPs cannot effectively prevent this, yet when the zombie awakens and spams, everyone else using the same server is punished by the blacklist.</p><p>You are just moving the hassle to the other guy, which is once again, bad. There is no "magic bullet" solution to spam, but it pays to be considerate and responsible. And if your customers leave because they can't receive legitimate mail, don't be surprised. And if your answer is "It ain't my problem", you don't deserve them anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is exactly the middle-management mentality that causes so much trouble : " Look , it works , it killed the fly .
Oh , and it also killed the whole village... " Maybe you would be better off plugging the network cable off - voila , stops spam 100 \ % .
The problem is that blacklists like these create a lot of false positives - legitimate customers of other ISPs whose IPs and IP ranges got blacklisted ca n't mail to your clients .
Not your problem ?
Wrong , it is your problem , because by applying the blacklist " solution " without proper consideration , you are punishing innocent people collectively ( bad practice ) .Imagine an ISP with outgoing mailserver for many ADSL users - many users today have compromised Windows instalations serving as zombies for spammers .
ISPs can not effectively prevent this , yet when the zombie awakens and spams , everyone else using the same server is punished by the blacklist.You are just moving the hassle to the other guy , which is once again , bad .
There is no " magic bullet " solution to spam , but it pays to be considerate and responsible .
And if your customers leave because they ca n't receive legitimate mail , do n't be surprised .
And if your answer is " It ai n't my problem " , you do n't deserve them anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is exactly the middle-management mentality that causes so much trouble: "Look, it works, it killed the fly.
Oh, and it also killed the whole village..."Maybe you would be better off plugging the network cable off - voila, stops spam 100\%.
The problem is that blacklists like these create a lot of false positives - legitimate customers of other ISPs whose IPs and IP ranges got blacklisted can't mail to your clients.
Not your problem?
Wrong, it is your problem, because by applying the blacklist "solution" without proper consideration, you are punishing innocent people collectively (bad practice).Imagine an ISP with outgoing mailserver for many ADSL users - many users today have compromised Windows instalations serving as zombies for spammers.
ISPs cannot effectively prevent this, yet when the zombie awakens and spams, everyone else using the same server is punished by the blacklist.You are just moving the hassle to the other guy, which is once again, bad.
There is no "magic bullet" solution to spam, but it pays to be considerate and responsible.
And if your customers leave because they can't receive legitimate mail, don't be surprised.
And if your answer is "It ain't my problem", you don't deserve them anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448995</id>
	<title>full disclosure</title>
	<author>corbettw</author>
	<datestamp>1245777240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>kdawson should've included the disclosure that SourceForge, one of Slashdot's sister companies, is a sponsor of SORBS. There's an ad on the right side of the SORBS main page touting this fact, so it's not like it should've been difficult for him to find to point out in the summary.</htmltext>
<tokenext>kdawson should 've included the disclosure that SourceForge , one of Slashdot 's sister companies , is a sponsor of SORBS .
There 's an ad on the right side of the SORBS main page touting this fact , so it 's not like it should 've been difficult for him to find to point out in the summary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>kdawson should've included the disclosure that SourceForge, one of Slashdot's sister companies, is a sponsor of SORBS.
There's an ad on the right side of the SORBS main page touting this fact, so it's not like it should've been difficult for him to find to point out in the summary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447867</id>
	<title>WOW!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245765300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is an <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/sorbs" title="linkedin.com" rel="nofollow">ugly woman</a> [linkedin.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is an ugly woman [ linkedin.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is an ugly woman [linkedin.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448565</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>jmcvetta</author>
	<datestamp>1245772920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I hunted a spammer down and ratted him out to his own mother</p></div><p>Let me buy this man a beer!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hunted a spammer down and ratted him out to his own motherLet me buy this man a beer !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hunted a spammer down and ratted him out to his own motherLet me buy this man a beer!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447965</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448111</id>
	<title>I didn't know Kevin Sorbo was sick.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245767580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RIP Herc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RIP Herc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RIP Herc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450003</id>
	<title>Re:Sorbs ok by me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245875580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the thing is - it does not report dynamic IP's<br>Whatever netblock Michelle feels is dynamic gets added - Even if its a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/22 serving only fiber connections.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the thing is - it does not report dynamic IP'sWhatever netblock Michelle feels is dynamic gets added - Even if its a /22 serving only fiber connections .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the thing is - it does not report dynamic IP'sWhatever netblock Michelle feels is dynamic gets added - Even if its a /22 serving only fiber connections.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449865</id>
	<title>Re:No big loss!</title>
	<author>wvmarle</author>
	<datestamp>1245873780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a fixed IP address (according to my provider, BizNetvigator - I'm paying for a fixed address at least!) but according to SORBS I am in a "dynamic IP range", and they can not and will not unlist my IP address. As a result I am forced to relay my mails through the mail server of my provider. Totally unnecessary but it's the only way to assure delivery of e-mails. Many of my mails are rejected and bounce at smtp handshake level, I guess there will be plenty that are silently dropping it - both I consider bad practice, I want to receive my suspected junk, dump it in a junk folder, and look through it once a day to make sure. Greylisting takes care of 95\% of the spam already, so only a dozen or so junks come in every day.
</p><p>Also I do see sometimes my mails being greylisted, but as I'm running a real mail server that just causes some delays. It will try again shortly after.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a fixed IP address ( according to my provider , BizNetvigator - I 'm paying for a fixed address at least !
) but according to SORBS I am in a " dynamic IP range " , and they can not and will not unlist my IP address .
As a result I am forced to relay my mails through the mail server of my provider .
Totally unnecessary but it 's the only way to assure delivery of e-mails .
Many of my mails are rejected and bounce at smtp handshake level , I guess there will be plenty that are silently dropping it - both I consider bad practice , I want to receive my suspected junk , dump it in a junk folder , and look through it once a day to make sure .
Greylisting takes care of 95 \ % of the spam already , so only a dozen or so junks come in every day .
Also I do see sometimes my mails being greylisted , but as I 'm running a real mail server that just causes some delays .
It will try again shortly after .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a fixed IP address (according to my provider, BizNetvigator - I'm paying for a fixed address at least!
) but according to SORBS I am in a "dynamic IP range", and they can not and will not unlist my IP address.
As a result I am forced to relay my mails through the mail server of my provider.
Totally unnecessary but it's the only way to assure delivery of e-mails.
Many of my mails are rejected and bounce at smtp handshake level, I guess there will be plenty that are silently dropping it - both I consider bad practice, I want to receive my suspected junk, dump it in a junk folder, and look through it once a day to make sure.
Greylisting takes care of 95\% of the spam already, so only a dozen or so junks come in every day.
Also I do see sometimes my mails being greylisted, but as I'm running a real mail server that just causes some delays.
It will try again shortly after.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448461</id>
	<title>Greatly exaggerated</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245771900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.cottbus.de/gaeste/wissenswertes/tradition/index.en.html" title="cottbus.de" rel="nofollow">Sorbs</a> [cottbus.de] are alive and kicking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorbs [ cottbus.de ] are alive and kicking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorbs [cottbus.de] are alive and kicking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448133</id>
	<title>Potential bidders?</title>
	<author>e9th</author>
	<datestamp>1245767820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>SORBS is officially "For Sale" should anyone wish to purchase it as a going concern</p></div></blockquote><p>Now that <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/23/0034241/Spammer-Alan-Ralsky-Pleads-Guilty" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Alan Ralsky</a> [slashdot.org] is out of business, who would want to buy it?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>SORBS is officially " For Sale " should anyone wish to purchase it as a going concernNow that Alan Ralsky [ slashdot.org ] is out of business , who would want to buy it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SORBS is officially "For Sale" should anyone wish to purchase it as a going concernNow that Alan Ralsky [slashdot.org] is out of business, who would want to buy it?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448695</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1245774600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I had to switch ISPs, my static IP ended up in the middle of a block of addresses blocked by SORBS.  Dealing with that miserable, vile prick who was running it was impossible, and finally my new ISP went to bat for me.  Despite all of that, no less than Hotmail was still blocking based solely on SORBS.</p><p>SORBS is bad.  Michael/Michelle/Debbie/Frank/Whoever is a worthless repugnant piece of scum.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I had to switch ISPs , my static IP ended up in the middle of a block of addresses blocked by SORBS .
Dealing with that miserable , vile prick who was running it was impossible , and finally my new ISP went to bat for me .
Despite all of that , no less than Hotmail was still blocking based solely on SORBS.SORBS is bad .
Michael/Michelle/Debbie/Frank/Whoever is a worthless repugnant piece of scum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I had to switch ISPs, my static IP ended up in the middle of a block of addresses blocked by SORBS.
Dealing with that miserable, vile prick who was running it was impossible, and finally my new ISP went to bat for me.
Despite all of that, no less than Hotmail was still blocking based solely on SORBS.SORBS is bad.
Michael/Michelle/Debbie/Frank/Whoever is a worthless repugnant piece of scum.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448087</id>
	<title>Good riddance.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245767400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SORBS: Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SORBS : Do n't let the door hit your ass on the way out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SORBS: Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28453247</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing's wrong with SORBS</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1245861720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's a defamatory load of crap.  Anyone who defends SORBS has no idea how much it's reviled by the rest of the anti-spam community.  Saying "SORBS works" is rather like saying "pulling half the breakers out of your electrical panel is a good way to save on electricity".</p><p>You may be a professional, but that's only because there's no meaningful code of standards or abilities for people who run mail servers.  Believe me, pal, I ain't spammer.  I was the sysadmin at a small ISP for a decade, and was pretty involved in a number of anti-spam communities, and the only people that defended SORBS were half-wits like you, who didn't understand how a badly managed RBL like SORBS could do serious harm to SMTP infrastructure.  In fact, most of the anti-spam guys I talked to over the years dislike RBLs in general, but at the very least some of them, like Spamhaus, are run by a guy (or girl or whatever) who isn't an extortionist and control freak.</p><p>If you think SORBS works, then I pity your customers.  I don't know what kinds of lies or distortions you used to get your contracts, but they're being ripped off by an ignorant and lazy moron.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a defamatory load of crap .
Anyone who defends SORBS has no idea how much it 's reviled by the rest of the anti-spam community .
Saying " SORBS works " is rather like saying " pulling half the breakers out of your electrical panel is a good way to save on electricity " .You may be a professional , but that 's only because there 's no meaningful code of standards or abilities for people who run mail servers .
Believe me , pal , I ai n't spammer .
I was the sysadmin at a small ISP for a decade , and was pretty involved in a number of anti-spam communities , and the only people that defended SORBS were half-wits like you , who did n't understand how a badly managed RBL like SORBS could do serious harm to SMTP infrastructure .
In fact , most of the anti-spam guys I talked to over the years dislike RBLs in general , but at the very least some of them , like Spamhaus , are run by a guy ( or girl or whatever ) who is n't an extortionist and control freak.If you think SORBS works , then I pity your customers .
I do n't know what kinds of lies or distortions you used to get your contracts , but they 're being ripped off by an ignorant and lazy moron .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a defamatory load of crap.
Anyone who defends SORBS has no idea how much it's reviled by the rest of the anti-spam community.
Saying "SORBS works" is rather like saying "pulling half the breakers out of your electrical panel is a good way to save on electricity".You may be a professional, but that's only because there's no meaningful code of standards or abilities for people who run mail servers.
Believe me, pal, I ain't spammer.
I was the sysadmin at a small ISP for a decade, and was pretty involved in a number of anti-spam communities, and the only people that defended SORBS were half-wits like you, who didn't understand how a badly managed RBL like SORBS could do serious harm to SMTP infrastructure.
In fact, most of the anti-spam guys I talked to over the years dislike RBLs in general, but at the very least some of them, like Spamhaus, are run by a guy (or girl or whatever) who isn't an extortionist and control freak.If you think SORBS works, then I pity your customers.
I don't know what kinds of lies or distortions you used to get your contracts, but they're being ripped off by an ignorant and lazy moron.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450491</id>
	<title>Re:No big loss!</title>
	<author>montyzooooma</author>
	<datestamp>1245840180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't that the real problem? SORBS doesn't find anyone else to give them a home (good!) but then sell out to a bunch of crooks who start running the blacklist as a real extortion tool for profit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that the real problem ?
SORBS does n't find anyone else to give them a home ( good !
) but then sell out to a bunch of crooks who start running the blacklist as a real extortion tool for profit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that the real problem?
SORBS doesn't find anyone else to give them a home (good!
) but then sell out to a bunch of crooks who start running the blacklist as a real extortion tool for profit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450045</id>
	<title>Re:The REAL story</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1245876060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SORBS is kinda like SCO for generating those kinds of discussions.  Just imagine how great a SCO thread would be if it had pictures of Daryl McBride in drag!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SORBS is kinda like SCO for generating those kinds of discussions .
Just imagine how great a SCO thread would be if it had pictures of Daryl McBride in drag !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SORBS is kinda like SCO for generating those kinds of discussions.
Just imagine how great a SCO thread would be if it had pictures of Daryl McBride in drag!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447849</id>
	<title>Big rack...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245765180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Especially for someone with a sex change operation.</p><blockquote><div><p>The post, signed "<b>Michelle Sullivan (Previously known as Matthew Sullivan)</b>," says that the project needs either to "find alternative hosting for <b>a 42RU rack</b> in the Brisbane area of Queensland Australia" or to find a buyer.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Especially for someone with a sex change operation.The post , signed " Michelle Sullivan ( Previously known as Matthew Sullivan ) , " says that the project needs either to " find alternative hosting for a 42RU rack in the Brisbane area of Queensland Australia " or to find a buyer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Especially for someone with a sex change operation.The post, signed "Michelle Sullivan (Previously known as Matthew Sullivan)," says that the project needs either to "find alternative hosting for a 42RU rack in the Brisbane area of Queensland Australia" or to find a buyer.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450237</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245835560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes! It is so awful dealing with people like this who always assume you are an evil spammer no matter how much proof you provide to the contrary - they just say 'well a spammer would say that' or 'you could have forged that' no matter what evidence you present. Forums associated with sorbs (can't remember which ones) were particularly awful place to request help.<p>

Having said that, when I finally figured out how to get through by phone, Matthew (as he was then) was helpful and reasonable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes !
It is so awful dealing with people like this who always assume you are an evil spammer no matter how much proof you provide to the contrary - they just say 'well a spammer would say that ' or 'you could have forged that ' no matter what evidence you present .
Forums associated with sorbs ( ca n't remember which ones ) were particularly awful place to request help .
Having said that , when I finally figured out how to get through by phone , Matthew ( as he was then ) was helpful and reasonable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes!
It is so awful dealing with people like this who always assume you are an evil spammer no matter how much proof you provide to the contrary - they just say 'well a spammer would say that' or 'you could have forged that' no matter what evidence you present.
Forums associated with sorbs (can't remember which ones) were particularly awful place to request help.
Having said that, when I finally figured out how to get through by phone, Matthew (as he was then) was helpful and reasonable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448033</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451539</id>
	<title>Adios!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245853380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good riddance SORBS.  Won't miss you at all!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good riddance SORBS .
Wo n't miss you at all !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good riddance SORBS.
Won't miss you at all!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447839</id>
	<title>Wow!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245765120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A 42RU cabinet just for SORBS!   No wonder they're being kicked out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A 42RU cabinet just for SORBS !
No wonder they 're being kicked out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A 42RU cabinet just for SORBS!
No wonder they're being kicked out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448737</id>
	<title>MATTHEW IS WATCHING THIS THREAD</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245774900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ALL,</p><p>Matthew is watching this thread!!! Doesn't it feel good? Basking in the shadow of a mentally disturbed, cross dressing, homosexual, AIDS FAGGOT!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ALL,Matthew is watching this thread ! ! !
Does n't it feel good ?
Basking in the shadow of a mentally disturbed , cross dressing , homosexual , AIDS FAGGOT !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ALL,Matthew is watching this thread!!!
Doesn't it feel good?
Basking in the shadow of a mentally disturbed, cross dressing, homosexual, AIDS FAGGOT!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447961</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>lawpoop</author>
	<datestamp>1245766080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the case nowadays that blackhole lists ( or whatever they're called ) are used mainly as a factor in weighing scores in Bayesian methods of filtering spam, rather than just blocking email outright? In other words, the usage is still widespread, not for direct blocking, but for helping a program decide if its spam or not?<br> <br> If so, this would let more spam through spam filters, really.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Correct me if I 'm wrong , but is n't it the case nowadays that blackhole lists ( or whatever they 're called ) are used mainly as a factor in weighing scores in Bayesian methods of filtering spam , rather than just blocking email outright ?
In other words , the usage is still widespread , not for direct blocking , but for helping a program decide if its spam or not ?
If so , this would let more spam through spam filters , really .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the case nowadays that blackhole lists ( or whatever they're called ) are used mainly as a factor in weighing scores in Bayesian methods of filtering spam, rather than just blocking email outright?
In other words, the usage is still widespread, not for direct blocking, but for helping a program decide if its spam or not?
If so, this would let more spam through spam filters, really.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449019</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>Cramer</author>
	<datestamp>1245777540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My current static address from AT&amp;T is listed in only one list... MAPS.  Despite it being neither dynamic nor "dialup", they refuse to remove it first stating the request must come from the ISP, then stating the ISP explicitly listed the range with them as dynamic (which is a complete lie, as Bellsouth doesn't bother.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My current static address from AT&amp;T is listed in only one list... MAPS. Despite it being neither dynamic nor " dialup " , they refuse to remove it first stating the request must come from the ISP , then stating the ISP explicitly listed the range with them as dynamic ( which is a complete lie , as Bellsouth does n't bother .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My current static address from AT&amp;T is listed in only one list... MAPS.  Despite it being neither dynamic nor "dialup", they refuse to remove it first stating the request must come from the ISP, then stating the ISP explicitly listed the range with them as dynamic (which is a complete lie, as Bellsouth doesn't bother.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448549</id>
	<title>some good DNSBLs</title>
	<author>Onymous Coward</author>
	<datestamp>1245772860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recommend <b> <a href="http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/297.html" title="spamcop.net">Spamhaus XBL</a> [spamcop.net] </b> and <b> <a href="http://www.spamhaus.org/xbl/" title="spamhaus.org">Spamcop Blocking List</a> [spamhaus.org] </b>.</p><p>Spamcop used to have problems, but <a href="http://www.dnsbl.com/2007/05/spamcop-bl-another-look-its-accurate.html" title="dnsbl.com">I think they resolved them a couple years ago</a> [dnsbl.com].</p><p>Back when <a href="http://stats.dnsbl.com/" title="dnsbl.com">http://stats.dnsbl.com/</a> [dnsbl.com] was operational I used their data to give me a quick leg up on figuring out which lists to look at.  Then I checked out the lists for how they operate and then did a performance analysis.</p><p>Aside from policy/operation, two things that were particularly important to me were false positives and overlap.  These lists get very low false positives and they combine nicely.</p><p>Old stats:</p><p><a href="http://stats.dnsbl.com/zen.html" title="dnsbl.com">http://stats.dnsbl.com/zen.html</a> [dnsbl.com]</p><p><a href="http://stats.dnsbl.com/spamcop.html" title="dnsbl.com">http://stats.dnsbl.com/spamcop.html</a> [dnsbl.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recommend Spamhaus XBL [ spamcop.net ] and Spamcop Blocking List [ spamhaus.org ] .Spamcop used to have problems , but I think they resolved them a couple years ago [ dnsbl.com ] .Back when http : //stats.dnsbl.com/ [ dnsbl.com ] was operational I used their data to give me a quick leg up on figuring out which lists to look at .
Then I checked out the lists for how they operate and then did a performance analysis.Aside from policy/operation , two things that were particularly important to me were false positives and overlap .
These lists get very low false positives and they combine nicely.Old stats : http : //stats.dnsbl.com/zen.html [ dnsbl.com ] http : //stats.dnsbl.com/spamcop.html [ dnsbl.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recommend  Spamhaus XBL [spamcop.net]  and  Spamcop Blocking List [spamhaus.org] .Spamcop used to have problems, but I think they resolved them a couple years ago [dnsbl.com].Back when http://stats.dnsbl.com/ [dnsbl.com] was operational I used their data to give me a quick leg up on figuring out which lists to look at.
Then I checked out the lists for how they operate and then did a performance analysis.Aside from policy/operation, two things that were particularly important to me were false positives and overlap.
These lists get very low false positives and they combine nicely.Old stats:http://stats.dnsbl.com/zen.html [dnsbl.com]http://stats.dnsbl.com/spamcop.html [dnsbl.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449645</id>
	<title>SORBS is probably useless</title>
	<author>RGRistroph</author>
	<datestamp>1245784980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I maintain several mail servers for various clients.  Dealing with spam takes up a lot of time and resources, but I have also spent a lot of time trying to get my legitimate fixed-IP business class IPs off of SORBS "dynamic IP" list.  I think SORBS probably ended up being a net loss in the spam war, because admin resources that could have been spent fighting spam were instead spent trying to avoid friendly fire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I maintain several mail servers for various clients .
Dealing with spam takes up a lot of time and resources , but I have also spent a lot of time trying to get my legitimate fixed-IP business class IPs off of SORBS " dynamic IP " list .
I think SORBS probably ended up being a net loss in the spam war , because admin resources that could have been spent fighting spam were instead spent trying to avoid friendly fire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I maintain several mail servers for various clients.
Dealing with spam takes up a lot of time and resources, but I have also spent a lot of time trying to get my legitimate fixed-IP business class IPs off of SORBS "dynamic IP" list.
I think SORBS probably ended up being a net loss in the spam war, because admin resources that could have been spent fighting spam were instead spent trying to avoid friendly fire.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450873</id>
	<title>Re:Matthew/Michelle</title>
	<author>oliderid</author>
	<datestamp>1245846600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So what? What's the point? She does a good job, this what matters for those using her service. If she likes  to be dressed as a gladiator, mickey mouse or whatever she wants to while doing it, that's totally up to her. I don't care, I won't be forced to live with her, that's her life and her choice. If you feel threatened by her choice, I suggest you to visit a shrink to talk about your sexuality or move to Iran.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So what ?
What 's the point ?
She does a good job , this what matters for those using her service .
If she likes to be dressed as a gladiator , mickey mouse or whatever she wants to while doing it , that 's totally up to her .
I do n't care , I wo n't be forced to live with her , that 's her life and her choice .
If you feel threatened by her choice , I suggest you to visit a shrink to talk about your sexuality or move to Iran .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what?
What's the point?
She does a good job, this what matters for those using her service.
If she likes  to be dressed as a gladiator, mickey mouse or whatever she wants to while doing it, that's totally up to her.
I don't care, I won't be forced to live with her, that's her life and her choice.
If you feel threatened by her choice, I suggest you to visit a shrink to talk about your sexuality or move to Iran.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447845</id>
	<title>Oh my god</title>
	<author>bhenson</author>
	<datestamp>1245765180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh my god the spam is burning, burning I tell you</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh my god the spam is burning , burning I tell you</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh my god the spam is burning, burning I tell you</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451249</id>
	<title>The have Postini's block listed</title>
	<author>gravyface</author>
	<datestamp>1245851220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I get the odd call from a Postini client who's been on mxtoolbox.com, crying, "why am I blacklisted? zomg!".  SORBS == idiots.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I get the odd call from a Postini client who 's been on mxtoolbox.com , crying , " why am I blacklisted ?
zomg ! " . SORBS = = idiots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I get the odd call from a Postini client who's been on mxtoolbox.com, crying, "why am I blacklisted?
zomg!".  SORBS == idiots.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28452121</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing's wrong with SORBS</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1245856860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As usual in the discussion on blocklisting, Slashdot is being overrun by, ehm, 'legitimate biznizmen' and their supporters, and people who know jack shit about blocklisting and its history, but believe those who shout the loudest.</p></div><p>I got paid to write <a href="http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/focus\_spam\_postfix" title="freesoftwaremagazine.com">an article on how to block spam</a> [freesoftwaremagazine.com], partially by using DNSBLs.  Am I qualifed to say that SORBS sucks, or am I still in your "amateur" or "'legitimate biznizmen" categories?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As usual in the discussion on blocklisting , Slashdot is being overrun by , ehm , 'legitimate biznizmen ' and their supporters , and people who know jack shit about blocklisting and its history , but believe those who shout the loudest.I got paid to write an article on how to block spam [ freesoftwaremagazine.com ] , partially by using DNSBLs .
Am I qualifed to say that SORBS sucks , or am I still in your " amateur " or " 'legitimate biznizmen " categories ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As usual in the discussion on blocklisting, Slashdot is being overrun by, ehm, 'legitimate biznizmen' and their supporters, and people who know jack shit about blocklisting and its history, but believe those who shout the loudest.I got paid to write an article on how to block spam [freesoftwaremagazine.com], partially by using DNSBLs.
Am I qualifed to say that SORBS sucks, or am I still in your "amateur" or "'legitimate biznizmen" categories?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835</id>
	<title>No big loss!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245765060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A blacklist that charges you to get your IP removed will inevitably block far more than real spammers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A blacklist that charges you to get your IP removed will inevitably block far more than real spammers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A blacklist that charges you to get your IP removed will inevitably block far more than real spammers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448397</id>
	<title>What's this then, eh?</title>
	<author>aweraw</author>
	<datestamp>1245771180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ROM's being charged for: <a href="http://vampire.isux.com/ROMs/" title="isux.com">http://vampire.isux.com/ROMs/</a> [isux.com]</p><p>Dubious images: <a href="http://vampire.isux.com/pics/x/" title="isux.com">http://vampire.isux.com/pics/x/</a> [isux.com]</p><p>So what's going on Matthew... I mean, Michelle?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ROM 's being charged for : http : //vampire.isux.com/ROMs/ [ isux.com ] Dubious images : http : //vampire.isux.com/pics/x/ [ isux.com ] So what 's going on Matthew... I mean , Michelle ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ROM's being charged for: http://vampire.isux.com/ROMs/ [isux.com]Dubious images: http://vampire.isux.com/pics/x/ [isux.com]So what's going on Matthew... I mean, Michelle?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28452621</id>
	<title>Hip, hip, hooray!</title>
	<author>Kamamura</author>
	<datestamp>1245859320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Finally, these self-righteous, blackmailing schmoosters go down in flames! I wonder how much money they extorted over the years, but I guess people eventually came to their senses and stopped paying.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally , these self-righteous , blackmailing schmoosters go down in flames !
I wonder how much money they extorted over the years , but I guess people eventually came to their senses and stopped paying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally, these self-righteous, blackmailing schmoosters go down in flames!
I wonder how much money they extorted over the years, but I guess people eventually came to their senses and stopped paying.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448955</id>
	<title>THIS IS THE BEST NEWS I HAVE HEARD ALL YEAR!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245776760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SORBS would repeatedly list netblocks purely cos they did not comply with an RFC Michael himself wrote.<br>They would delist them after a week or so, and usually be relisted within the month. And i am talking larger than<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/24 netblocks, which he claimed were "dynamic".  I dont ever actually recall being blocked by SORBS for any sort of spam or open relay issue - Always to do with his ego-stroking DNS crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SORBS would repeatedly list netblocks purely cos they did not comply with an RFC Michael himself wrote.They would delist them after a week or so , and usually be relisted within the month .
And i am talking larger than /24 netblocks , which he claimed were " dynamic " .
I dont ever actually recall being blocked by SORBS for any sort of spam or open relay issue - Always to do with his ego-stroking DNS crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SORBS would repeatedly list netblocks purely cos they did not comply with an RFC Michael himself wrote.They would delist them after a week or so, and usually be relisted within the month.
And i am talking larger than /24 netblocks, which he claimed were "dynamic".
I dont ever actually recall being blocked by SORBS for any sort of spam or open relay issue - Always to do with his ego-stroking DNS crap.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448645</id>
	<title>Matthew/Michelle</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245773880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The issue of Matthew/Michelle is totally relevant. It lets us see what a fucked up individual Matthew Sullivan is. It's now apparent he has a severe mental illness, one so severe he is infact considering genital mutilation.</p><p>Mental Illness goes part the way to explain why sorbs was such a fucked up service run by someone who appeared to be complete mad, irrational and illogical.</p><p>Now, heres hopeing he takes his mental illness to the next level, and removes himself from the gene pool. The unfortunate fact is Matthew has a 15 year old son.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The issue of Matthew/Michelle is totally relevant .
It lets us see what a fucked up individual Matthew Sullivan is .
It 's now apparent he has a severe mental illness , one so severe he is infact considering genital mutilation.Mental Illness goes part the way to explain why sorbs was such a fucked up service run by someone who appeared to be complete mad , irrational and illogical.Now , heres hopeing he takes his mental illness to the next level , and removes himself from the gene pool .
The unfortunate fact is Matthew has a 15 year old son .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The issue of Matthew/Michelle is totally relevant.
It lets us see what a fucked up individual Matthew Sullivan is.
It's now apparent he has a severe mental illness, one so severe he is infact considering genital mutilation.Mental Illness goes part the way to explain why sorbs was such a fucked up service run by someone who appeared to be complete mad, irrational and illogical.Now, heres hopeing he takes his mental illness to the next level, and removes himself from the gene pool.
The unfortunate fact is Matthew has a 15 year old son.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449217</id>
	<title>Sorbs ok by me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245780000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorbs is what it is.  It reports dynamic ip's, isp's who have major spam problems, etc.  How (or if) you use the info is up to you.  No reason to bitch at them, unless you're a spammer.  I've used sorbs for years, no complaints from my users.  And ISP's only have themselves to blame if they end up on the list.  It's not that hard to detect spam or massive amounts of email coming from your IP's.   The fact is that many IPS's don't care or happily pocket the money they get from spammers.  And yes I happily block entire ISP's if spam from them doesn't stop after I send to their abuse@.  Even if it's from a different IP the second and third time.  Once ISP's realize that their IP blocks are useless because they didn't do their job in detecting what's coming from them maybe they will wise up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorbs is what it is .
It reports dynamic ip 's , isp 's who have major spam problems , etc .
How ( or if ) you use the info is up to you .
No reason to bitch at them , unless you 're a spammer .
I 've used sorbs for years , no complaints from my users .
And ISP 's only have themselves to blame if they end up on the list .
It 's not that hard to detect spam or massive amounts of email coming from your IP 's .
The fact is that many IPS 's do n't care or happily pocket the money they get from spammers .
And yes I happily block entire ISP 's if spam from them does n't stop after I send to their abuse @ .
Even if it 's from a different IP the second and third time .
Once ISP 's realize that their IP blocks are useless because they did n't do their job in detecting what 's coming from them maybe they will wise up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorbs is what it is.
It reports dynamic ip's, isp's who have major spam problems, etc.
How (or if) you use the info is up to you.
No reason to bitch at them, unless you're a spammer.
I've used sorbs for years, no complaints from my users.
And ISP's only have themselves to blame if they end up on the list.
It's not that hard to detect spam or massive amounts of email coming from your IP's.
The fact is that many IPS's don't care or happily pocket the money they get from spammers.
And yes I happily block entire ISP's if spam from them doesn't stop after I send to their abuse@.
Even if it's from a different IP the second and third time.
Once ISP's realize that their IP blocks are useless because they didn't do their job in detecting what's coming from them maybe they will wise up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448931</id>
	<title>Don't let the door hit you in the ass...</title>
	<author>NitroWolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245776460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the best news I've heard all week!</p><p>SORBS is a blight on the anti-spam effort front and should have been run out of town on a rail years ago.  It has done more damage to the perception of anti-spam lists than any other single entity on the internet.  Hell, some spammers are better behaved and have better morals than the operator(s) of SORBS.  I would literally turn to Microsoft or McAffee for anti-spam solutions before I'd even consider SORBS.</p><p>I hope the dirtbags that ran SORBS end up destitute in a gutter somewhere.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the best news I 've heard all week ! SORBS is a blight on the anti-spam effort front and should have been run out of town on a rail years ago .
It has done more damage to the perception of anti-spam lists than any other single entity on the internet .
Hell , some spammers are better behaved and have better morals than the operator ( s ) of SORBS .
I would literally turn to Microsoft or McAffee for anti-spam solutions before I 'd even consider SORBS.I hope the dirtbags that ran SORBS end up destitute in a gutter somewhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the best news I've heard all week!SORBS is a blight on the anti-spam effort front and should have been run out of town on a rail years ago.
It has done more damage to the perception of anti-spam lists than any other single entity on the internet.
Hell, some spammers are better behaved and have better morals than the operator(s) of SORBS.
I would literally turn to Microsoft or McAffee for anti-spam solutions before I'd even consider SORBS.I hope the dirtbags that ran SORBS end up destitute in a gutter somewhere.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447863</id>
	<title>Explanation please</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245765240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Michelle Sullivan (Previously known as Matthew Sullivan),"</p><p>Huh?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Michelle Sullivan ( Previously known as Matthew Sullivan ) , " Huh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Michelle Sullivan (Previously known as Matthew Sullivan),"Huh?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448949</id>
	<title>Re:Matthew/Michelle</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245776700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>so severe he is in fact considering genital mutilation.</p></div><p>No, actually she categorically is not.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>so severe he is in fact considering genital mutilation.No , actually she categorically is not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so severe he is in fact considering genital mutilation.No, actually she categorically is not.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28472129</id>
	<title>Re:full disclosure</title>
	<author>deananderson</author>
	<datestamp>1245923580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those companies aren't sponsors. This is just another scam by SORBS. People are meant to *think* they are sponsors lending some kind of credibilty to SORBS. If you read closely, it says something to the effect of "Don't contact these companies to complain about SORBS"</p><p>The confidence scam strikes again.  All I can say is, Steve Cohen, SEX.COM thief appears to be connected to SORBS through Vixie, Cerf, the Crockers, and was the master of confidence scams.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those companies are n't sponsors .
This is just another scam by SORBS .
People are meant to * think * they are sponsors lending some kind of credibilty to SORBS .
If you read closely , it says something to the effect of " Do n't contact these companies to complain about SORBS " The confidence scam strikes again .
All I can say is , Steve Cohen , SEX.COM thief appears to be connected to SORBS through Vixie , Cerf , the Crockers , and was the master of confidence scams .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those companies aren't sponsors.
This is just another scam by SORBS.
People are meant to *think* they are sponsors lending some kind of credibilty to SORBS.
If you read closely, it says something to the effect of "Don't contact these companies to complain about SORBS"The confidence scam strikes again.
All I can say is, Steve Cohen, SEX.COM thief appears to be connected to SORBS through Vixie, Cerf, the Crockers, and was the master of confidence scams.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448995</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28460771</id>
	<title>Re:some good DNSBLs</title>
	<author>Sleepy</author>
	<datestamp>1245847560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You'd be AMAZED at how many clueless admins use Spamhaus ZEN as a content filter. For a SMTP blocklist, Zen is great.</p><p>For a content-filter, it's broken. Yes, content filter. Some anti-spams apparently let you select Zen for filtering, which is wrong. Residential IP email clients and servers get blocked even though they relayed THROUGH their ISPs mailserver. They could just be using Outlook, as standard for a home user.</p><p>Spamhaus needs a non-engineer to document how to use their blacklists. They DO say no not "deep header parse" messages with Zen, but it's like one line out of 12 paragraphs on the page. It's not emphasised in a FAQ. It's not translated.</p><p>I would go insane without Spamhaus Zen... it's great. But I also go insane with what some mail sites do with it, and looking at the Spamhaus documentation I can't say they're making it difficult for those sites to make such mistakes...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'd be AMAZED at how many clueless admins use Spamhaus ZEN as a content filter .
For a SMTP blocklist , Zen is great.For a content-filter , it 's broken .
Yes , content filter .
Some anti-spams apparently let you select Zen for filtering , which is wrong .
Residential IP email clients and servers get blocked even though they relayed THROUGH their ISPs mailserver .
They could just be using Outlook , as standard for a home user.Spamhaus needs a non-engineer to document how to use their blacklists .
They DO say no not " deep header parse " messages with Zen , but it 's like one line out of 12 paragraphs on the page .
It 's not emphasised in a FAQ .
It 's not translated.I would go insane without Spamhaus Zen... it 's great .
But I also go insane with what some mail sites do with it , and looking at the Spamhaus documentation I ca n't say they 're making it difficult for those sites to make such mistakes.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'd be AMAZED at how many clueless admins use Spamhaus ZEN as a content filter.
For a SMTP blocklist, Zen is great.For a content-filter, it's broken.
Yes, content filter.
Some anti-spams apparently let you select Zen for filtering, which is wrong.
Residential IP email clients and servers get blocked even though they relayed THROUGH their ISPs mailserver.
They could just be using Outlook, as standard for a home user.Spamhaus needs a non-engineer to document how to use their blacklists.
They DO say no not "deep header parse" messages with Zen, but it's like one line out of 12 paragraphs on the page.
It's not emphasised in a FAQ.
It's not translated.I would go insane without Spamhaus Zen... it's great.
But I also go insane with what some mail sites do with it, and looking at the Spamhaus documentation I can't say they're making it difficult for those sites to make such mistakes...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28455483</id>
	<title>Re:No big loss!</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1245869220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The 'X' makes it sound cool.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The 'X ' makes it sound cool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The 'X' makes it sound cool.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449469</id>
	<title>Network.com?</title>
	<author>plasticpixel</author>
	<datestamp>1245783300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not ask Sun/Oracle if they will host it on their cloud at network.com?  I hear they are giving alot of the capacity away right now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not ask Sun/Oracle if they will host it on their cloud at network.com ?
I hear they are giving alot of the capacity away right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not ask Sun/Oracle if they will host it on their cloud at network.com?
I hear they are giving alot of the capacity away right now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28462887</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>hardwarefreak</author>
	<datestamp>1245865500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the case nowadays that blackhole lists ( or whatever they're called ) are used mainly as a factor in weighing scores in Bayesian methods of filtering spam, rather than just blocking email outright? In other words, the usage is still widespread, not for direct blocking, but for helping a program decide if its spam or not?</p><p>
&nbsp; If so, this would let more spam through spam filters, really.</p></div><p>It depends on the individual mail admin or organization.  Some outright block on a dnsbl hit, some use it for scoring in their fav content filtering daemon.  On my 'vanity' MX that hosts my personal domain, I block outright based on dnsbl hits.  However, I'm pretty selective in the dnsbls that I use, and yes, SORBS is among the 6 or so I have configured.  I've only seen one "false positive" in 3 years or so of using SORBS, and that's because Playboy's "send this pic to a friend" feature has apparently caused too many complaints over the years, resulting in a listing of the sending IPs at Playboy's contractor, rsys.com or something like that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Correct me if I 'm wrong , but is n't it the case nowadays that blackhole lists ( or whatever they 're called ) are used mainly as a factor in weighing scores in Bayesian methods of filtering spam , rather than just blocking email outright ?
In other words , the usage is still widespread , not for direct blocking , but for helping a program decide if its spam or not ?
  If so , this would let more spam through spam filters , really.It depends on the individual mail admin or organization .
Some outright block on a dnsbl hit , some use it for scoring in their fav content filtering daemon .
On my 'vanity ' MX that hosts my personal domain , I block outright based on dnsbl hits .
However , I 'm pretty selective in the dnsbls that I use , and yes , SORBS is among the 6 or so I have configured .
I 've only seen one " false positive " in 3 years or so of using SORBS , and that 's because Playboy 's " send this pic to a friend " feature has apparently caused too many complaints over the years , resulting in a listing of the sending IPs at Playboy 's contractor , rsys.com or something like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the case nowadays that blackhole lists ( or whatever they're called ) are used mainly as a factor in weighing scores in Bayesian methods of filtering spam, rather than just blocking email outright?
In other words, the usage is still widespread, not for direct blocking, but for helping a program decide if its spam or not?
  If so, this would let more spam through spam filters, really.It depends on the individual mail admin or organization.
Some outright block on a dnsbl hit, some use it for scoring in their fav content filtering daemon.
On my 'vanity' MX that hosts my personal domain, I block outright based on dnsbl hits.
However, I'm pretty selective in the dnsbls that I use, and yes, SORBS is among the 6 or so I have configured.
I've only seen one "false positive" in 3 years or so of using SORBS, and that's because Playboy's "send this pic to a friend" feature has apparently caused too many complaints over the years, resulting in a listing of the sending IPs at Playboy's contractor, rsys.com or something like that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448073</id>
	<title>Death to SORBS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245767280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I run an ISP in the midwest. SORBS has caused so many problems, I don't want to bore you all with them here. I briefly talked  with Mr(s?) Sullivan via email back in 07 about several problems he caused by blocking subnets we had on both Nuvox and XO. His response to my email (which was long but detailed), I paster here for brevity:</p><p>---------snip---------<br>F\_ck off.</p><p>Yours trully,<br>ms<br>---------snip---------</p><p>Hopefully, she/he takes up dancing at a crossdress clubs and stays the \_hell\_ off the internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I run an ISP in the midwest .
SORBS has caused so many problems , I do n't want to bore you all with them here .
I briefly talked with Mr ( s ?
) Sullivan via email back in 07 about several problems he caused by blocking subnets we had on both Nuvox and XO .
His response to my email ( which was long but detailed ) , I paster here for brevity : ---------snip---------F \ _ck off.Yours trully,ms---------snip---------Hopefully , she/he takes up dancing at a crossdress clubs and stays the \ _hell \ _ off the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I run an ISP in the midwest.
SORBS has caused so many problems, I don't want to bore you all with them here.
I briefly talked  with Mr(s?
) Sullivan via email back in 07 about several problems he caused by blocking subnets we had on both Nuvox and XO.
His response to my email (which was long but detailed), I paster here for brevity:---------snip---------F\_ck off.Yours trully,ms---------snip---------Hopefully, she/he takes up dancing at a crossdress clubs and stays the \_hell\_ off the internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28457115</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing's wrong with SORBS</title>
	<author>prockcore</author>
	<datestamp>1245875340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Turning off your mail server completely is more effective than SORBS, and blocks only slightly more legitimate email.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Turning off your mail server completely is more effective than SORBS , and blocks only slightly more legitimate email .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Turning off your mail server completely is more effective than SORBS, and blocks only slightly more legitimate email.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451359</id>
	<title>Thank God</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245852060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Much like everyone else, I'm overjoyed by this news!!! Having to fight with SORBS about delisting IP blocks for months at a time, while irrate customers are threatening to cancel their services with you, and having your CFO breathing down your neck for resolution is not my idea of fun.</p><p>July 20th, 2009 can't come soon enough for me. I just hope no one decides to resurrect this fatally flawed and unresponsive system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Much like everyone else , I 'm overjoyed by this news ! ! !
Having to fight with SORBS about delisting IP blocks for months at a time , while irrate customers are threatening to cancel their services with you , and having your CFO breathing down your neck for resolution is not my idea of fun.July 20th , 2009 ca n't come soon enough for me .
I just hope no one decides to resurrect this fatally flawed and unresponsive system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Much like everyone else, I'm overjoyed by this news!!!
Having to fight with SORBS about delisting IP blocks for months at a time, while irrate customers are threatening to cancel their services with you, and having your CFO breathing down your neck for resolution is not my idea of fun.July 20th, 2009 can't come soon enough for me.
I just hope no one decides to resurrect this fatally flawed and unresponsive system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450637</id>
	<title>Re:No big loss!</title>
	<author>tehSpork</author>
	<datestamp>1245842760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's worth noting that pointing the extortion racket out during communications intended to get you removed from said blacklist will result in you never hearing another word from the people at SORBS. Funny thing though: After referring (numerous) complaining customers to SORBS as the source of all their woes I found myself removed from the blacklists in short order. Odd how that works.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's worth noting that pointing the extortion racket out during communications intended to get you removed from said blacklist will result in you never hearing another word from the people at SORBS .
Funny thing though : After referring ( numerous ) complaining customers to SORBS as the source of all their woes I found myself removed from the blacklists in short order .
Odd how that works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's worth noting that pointing the extortion racket out during communications intended to get you removed from said blacklist will result in you never hearing another word from the people at SORBS.
Funny thing though: After referring (numerous) complaining customers to SORBS as the source of all their woes I found myself removed from the blacklists in short order.
Odd how that works.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450539</id>
	<title>Interesting...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245841140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Michelle Sullivan (Previously known as Matthew Sullivan),"</p></div><p>The hint of what I thought could be 'slander' in the article made me "Google" the name.
<a href="http://www.myspace.com/michelle\_i\_sullivan" title="myspace.com">http://www.myspace.com/michelle\_i\_sullivan</a> [myspace.com] - turns out it's not slander.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Michelle Sullivan ( Previously known as Matthew Sullivan ) , " The hint of what I thought could be 'slander ' in the article made me " Google " the name .
http : //www.myspace.com/michelle \ _i \ _sullivan [ myspace.com ] - turns out it 's not slander .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Michelle Sullivan (Previously known as Matthew Sullivan),"The hint of what I thought could be 'slander' in the article made me "Google" the name.
http://www.myspace.com/michelle\_i\_sullivan [myspace.com] - turns out it's not slander.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449945</id>
	<title>Re:Death to SORBS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245874920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah look, one of the foul little control freaks whose so pathetic that he "volunteers" his time to a vicious little extortionist.</p><p>I'll dance on your little RBL's grave, my friend, and ponder just how worthless a human being you are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah look , one of the foul little control freaks whose so pathetic that he " volunteers " his time to a vicious little extortionist.I 'll dance on your little RBL 's grave , my friend , and ponder just how worthless a human being you are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah look, one of the foul little control freaks whose so pathetic that he "volunteers" his time to a vicious little extortionist.I'll dance on your little RBL's grave, my friend, and ponder just how worthless a human being you are.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448755</id>
	<title>Possible Alternate Hosting</title>
	<author>DaWilko</author>
	<datestamp>1245775080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hi Michelle,

One of our staff have left you a voice mail via the number posted on us.sorbs.net and I've shot you an email.

Please feel free to contact me back regarding possible alternate hosting.

Wilko</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi Michelle , One of our staff have left you a voice mail via the number posted on us.sorbs.net and I 've shot you an email .
Please feel free to contact me back regarding possible alternate hosting .
Wilko</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi Michelle,

One of our staff have left you a voice mail via the number posted on us.sorbs.net and I've shot you an email.
Please feel free to contact me back regarding possible alternate hosting.
Wilko</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448559</id>
	<title>Re:No big loss!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245772920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree - Blacklists are a pain!  My brother's domain got randomly blacklisted, as did another business venture I'm involved with.  None of them were spammers, but email was blocked - And requests to be 'unblocked' went into what could best be described as a 'black' hole.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree - Blacklists are a pain !
My brother 's domain got randomly blacklisted , as did another business venture I 'm involved with .
None of them were spammers , but email was blocked - And requests to be 'unblocked ' went into what could best be described as a 'black ' hole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree - Blacklists are a pain!
My brother's domain got randomly blacklisted, as did another business venture I'm involved with.
None of them were spammers, but email was blocked - And requests to be 'unblocked' went into what could best be described as a 'black' hole.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28455189</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing's wrong with SORBS</title>
	<author>jidar</author>
	<datestamp>1245868320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're a bad mail admin. Period.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're a bad mail admin .
Period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're a bad mail admin.
Period.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451841</id>
	<title>Re:*snort*</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1245855420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When 'collateral damage' was useful,</p></div><p>For some of us, that was never the case.  There are three viable ISPs in my city: Qwest, cable, and the local mom-and-pop.  I went with the latter to host my little home server because I knew the admins and the company had a good reputation.  Now, suppose SORBS blocks [1] their upstream.  What am I supposed to do, exactly?  Switch to one of the mega-ISPs that will actively try to prevent me from running a server?</p><p>No, the whole idea of collateral damage only looks good to sociopaths or people who've never had limited options.</p><p>[1] Their take on it: "We don't block!  We blacklist!"  My take on it: the hell you don't.  That's like CYBERsitter claiming that they don't block; they only provide recommendations.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When 'collateral damage ' was useful,For some of us , that was never the case .
There are three viable ISPs in my city : Qwest , cable , and the local mom-and-pop .
I went with the latter to host my little home server because I knew the admins and the company had a good reputation .
Now , suppose SORBS blocks [ 1 ] their upstream .
What am I supposed to do , exactly ?
Switch to one of the mega-ISPs that will actively try to prevent me from running a server ? No , the whole idea of collateral damage only looks good to sociopaths or people who 've never had limited options .
[ 1 ] Their take on it : " We do n't block !
We blacklist !
" My take on it : the hell you do n't .
That 's like CYBERsitter claiming that they do n't block ; they only provide recommendations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When 'collateral damage' was useful,For some of us, that was never the case.
There are three viable ISPs in my city: Qwest, cable, and the local mom-and-pop.
I went with the latter to host my little home server because I knew the admins and the company had a good reputation.
Now, suppose SORBS blocks [1] their upstream.
What am I supposed to do, exactly?
Switch to one of the mega-ISPs that will actively try to prevent me from running a server?No, the whole idea of collateral damage only looks good to sociopaths or people who've never had limited options.
[1] Their take on it: "We don't block!
We blacklist!
"  My take on it: the hell you don't.
That's like CYBERsitter claiming that they don't block; they only provide recommendations.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447965</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448381</id>
	<title>Asshats</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245771000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Caused me no end of grief back when I was on dialup with a dynamic IP address all the time. Kept me on their blacklist claiming I was a spam relay because of some windows exploit. I was on linux the whole time and absolutely was not part of some zombie spam relay thing. And they didn't care either, despite the obvious dichotomy there. "Take it up with your ISP" Ya RIGHT, the ISP was going to bump all their windows users or come up with the magic educate them all at the same time plan plus fix microsofts bogus buggy operating system. Like that is really going to happen. I mean, WTF, aren't half of windows machines compromised most of the time anyway? What's the purpose of these lists then "BTW, 7/8ths of the intertubes are spam relay nodes and/or part of some zombie network, so we here at SORRY are putting all of you on our evile blacklist!!1!"</p><p>These things serve no real purpose any longer, good to see them go. Nice idea, horrid implementation, ridiculous to think it could ever work, and this "power" went to their heads or something. Someone please send SORRY that copypasta about how their SPAM solution won't work, and please check every single box on the thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Caused me no end of grief back when I was on dialup with a dynamic IP address all the time .
Kept me on their blacklist claiming I was a spam relay because of some windows exploit .
I was on linux the whole time and absolutely was not part of some zombie spam relay thing .
And they did n't care either , despite the obvious dichotomy there .
" Take it up with your ISP " Ya RIGHT , the ISP was going to bump all their windows users or come up with the magic educate them all at the same time plan plus fix microsofts bogus buggy operating system .
Like that is really going to happen .
I mean , WTF , are n't half of windows machines compromised most of the time anyway ?
What 's the purpose of these lists then " BTW , 7/8ths of the intertubes are spam relay nodes and/or part of some zombie network , so we here at SORRY are putting all of you on our evile blacklist ! ! 1 !
" These things serve no real purpose any longer , good to see them go .
Nice idea , horrid implementation , ridiculous to think it could ever work , and this " power " went to their heads or something .
Someone please send SORRY that copypasta about how their SPAM solution wo n't work , and please check every single box on the thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Caused me no end of grief back when I was on dialup with a dynamic IP address all the time.
Kept me on their blacklist claiming I was a spam relay because of some windows exploit.
I was on linux the whole time and absolutely was not part of some zombie spam relay thing.
And they didn't care either, despite the obvious dichotomy there.
"Take it up with your ISP" Ya RIGHT, the ISP was going to bump all their windows users or come up with the magic educate them all at the same time plan plus fix microsofts bogus buggy operating system.
Like that is really going to happen.
I mean, WTF, aren't half of windows machines compromised most of the time anyway?
What's the purpose of these lists then "BTW, 7/8ths of the intertubes are spam relay nodes and/or part of some zombie network, so we here at SORRY are putting all of you on our evile blacklist!!1!
"These things serve no real purpose any longer, good to see them go.
Nice idea, horrid implementation, ridiculous to think it could ever work, and this "power" went to their heads or something.
Someone please send SORRY that copypasta about how their SPAM solution won't work, and please check every single box on the thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450863</id>
	<title>Re:Sorbs ok by me</title>
	<author>pyster</author>
	<datestamp>1245846480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>DIAF</htmltext>
<tokenext>DIAF</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DIAF</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448675</id>
	<title>Matthew = Michelle</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245774360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to know Matthew when he was still a guy, gave me a chuckle to see he is calling himself Michelle now.</p><p>She has updated the photo on her linkedin profile;<br>http://www.linkedin.com/in/sorbs</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to know Matthew when he was still a guy , gave me a chuckle to see he is calling himself Michelle now.She has updated the photo on her linkedin profile ; http : //www.linkedin.com/in/sorbs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to know Matthew when he was still a guy, gave me a chuckle to see he is calling himself Michelle now.She has updated the photo on her linkedin profile;http://www.linkedin.com/in/sorbs</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451467</id>
	<title>Re:Matthew/Michelle</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245852780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously? You think Sullivan's attitude is a result of his sexuality / gender? Sullivan is in the computer industry, specifically IT security, one of the biggest places to find A-Hole, greater than God attitudes.</p><p>I've known plenty of people with attitudes like Sullivan, and they aren't under going gender reassignment. Your comment is abusive, troll-like. Yep, you caught me. I responded to a troll argument, because I found it ignorant and I have a few minutes to deal with a punk like you.</p><p>If you actually believe the crap you write, you're a bigger A-Hole than Sullivan ever was in my opinion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously ?
You think Sullivan 's attitude is a result of his sexuality / gender ?
Sullivan is in the computer industry , specifically IT security , one of the biggest places to find A-Hole , greater than God attitudes.I 've known plenty of people with attitudes like Sullivan , and they are n't under going gender reassignment .
Your comment is abusive , troll-like .
Yep , you caught me .
I responded to a troll argument , because I found it ignorant and I have a few minutes to deal with a punk like you.If you actually believe the crap you write , you 're a bigger A-Hole than Sullivan ever was in my opinion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously?
You think Sullivan's attitude is a result of his sexuality / gender?
Sullivan is in the computer industry, specifically IT security, one of the biggest places to find A-Hole, greater than God attitudes.I've known plenty of people with attitudes like Sullivan, and they aren't under going gender reassignment.
Your comment is abusive, troll-like.
Yep, you caught me.
I responded to a troll argument, because I found it ignorant and I have a few minutes to deal with a punk like you.If you actually believe the crap you write, you're a bigger A-Hole than Sullivan ever was in my opinion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448705</id>
	<title>SORBS: about the most unprofessional RBL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245774660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have dealt with BL services for years now from the ISP side of things.  From my own experience, the only ones worse than SORBS were APEWS<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/SPEWS where one would have to go to the Usenet to post for removals and when one would post a removal, one was met with endless trolling, an utter waste of time.  APEWS would block entire ISPs, and even<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8 which is more than slightly ridiculous. SORBS, on the other hand, was unprofessional in responses time to time. Quick to resort to name-calling, which in my view is juvenile.  In the past 2 years or so getting a response was like pulling teeth, so SORBS being shutdown is probably the best thing for it. I contend that SORBS own volunteerism dropped off and they stayed behind not addressing requests for removal.  One of their tacky tactics was to respond to people who asked for removal within the block full well knowing that the ISP is to address the issue and not one of the sufferers in the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/23 or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/19 blocks they would list over a few spams hitting their spamtraps.  I know of some people at large ISPs are happy that it is being shutdown.  Being rude and ignoring requests for removal are utterly inexcusible.  At times the volunteers at SORBS behaved like juveniles, so no ISP wanted to even deal with them.

Another list from a few years ago was BLARS just another one that was just one big PITA.  A few BLs that are much more useful to the ISPs are Spamhaus, Spamcop, and CBL.

Though there is interest, I really hope no one purchases SORBS and keeps it going, it ruined its own reputation over time by being too aggressive and non-responsive.  The only good thing I can think of about SORBS is it had a FeedBackLoop (FBL) report sent on a weekly basis, IIRC, that would let the ISP know which IPs appeared to be sending out compromised spam.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have dealt with BL services for years now from the ISP side of things .
From my own experience , the only ones worse than SORBS were APEWS /SPEWS where one would have to go to the Usenet to post for removals and when one would post a removal , one was met with endless trolling , an utter waste of time .
APEWS would block entire ISPs , and even /8 which is more than slightly ridiculous .
SORBS , on the other hand , was unprofessional in responses time to time .
Quick to resort to name-calling , which in my view is juvenile .
In the past 2 years or so getting a response was like pulling teeth , so SORBS being shutdown is probably the best thing for it .
I contend that SORBS own volunteerism dropped off and they stayed behind not addressing requests for removal .
One of their tacky tactics was to respond to people who asked for removal within the block full well knowing that the ISP is to address the issue and not one of the sufferers in the /23 or /19 blocks they would list over a few spams hitting their spamtraps .
I know of some people at large ISPs are happy that it is being shutdown .
Being rude and ignoring requests for removal are utterly inexcusible .
At times the volunteers at SORBS behaved like juveniles , so no ISP wanted to even deal with them .
Another list from a few years ago was BLARS just another one that was just one big PITA .
A few BLs that are much more useful to the ISPs are Spamhaus , Spamcop , and CBL .
Though there is interest , I really hope no one purchases SORBS and keeps it going , it ruined its own reputation over time by being too aggressive and non-responsive .
The only good thing I can think of about SORBS is it had a FeedBackLoop ( FBL ) report sent on a weekly basis , IIRC , that would let the ISP know which IPs appeared to be sending out compromised spam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have dealt with BL services for years now from the ISP side of things.
From my own experience, the only ones worse than SORBS were APEWS /SPEWS where one would have to go to the Usenet to post for removals and when one would post a removal, one was met with endless trolling, an utter waste of time.
APEWS would block entire ISPs, and even /8 which is more than slightly ridiculous.
SORBS, on the other hand, was unprofessional in responses time to time.
Quick to resort to name-calling, which in my view is juvenile.
In the past 2 years or so getting a response was like pulling teeth, so SORBS being shutdown is probably the best thing for it.
I contend that SORBS own volunteerism dropped off and they stayed behind not addressing requests for removal.
One of their tacky tactics was to respond to people who asked for removal within the block full well knowing that the ISP is to address the issue and not one of the sufferers in the /23 or /19 blocks they would list over a few spams hitting their spamtraps.
I know of some people at large ISPs are happy that it is being shutdown.
Being rude and ignoring requests for removal are utterly inexcusible.
At times the volunteers at SORBS behaved like juveniles, so no ISP wanted to even deal with them.
Another list from a few years ago was BLARS just another one that was just one big PITA.
A few BLs that are much more useful to the ISPs are Spamhaus, Spamcop, and CBL.
Though there is interest, I really hope no one purchases SORBS and keeps it going, it ruined its own reputation over time by being too aggressive and non-responsive.
The only good thing I can think of about SORBS is it had a FeedBackLoop (FBL) report sent on a weekly basis, IIRC, that would let the ISP know which IPs appeared to be sending out compromised spam.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451311</id>
	<title>Re:No big loss!</title>
	<author>sglewis100</author>
	<datestamp>1245851640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Having a PTR record on your IP that matches the SMTP hostname is common practice. In fact, us mail administrators in particular love it, because except for the people who happen to have their own AS number and own their own IP space, it pretty much requires you to involve your ISP or hosting provider to get the entry setup. Which pretty much guarantees that those people have an ISP that knows you are running a mail server. Checking that your SMTP server's HELO/EHLO broadcast matches it's rdns lookup is one of my favorite checks in my mail gateways, since it's low cost (simple DNS query, easily cached) and very effective at weeding out people who maybe shouldn't be running a mail server in the first place due to having the wrong plan with an ISP, or perhaps someone who suffers from ineptitude about how to setup an outbound mail server. Sorry, those glory days of just opening up a SMTP server on port 25 and sending mail have been gone... for years!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having a PTR record on your IP that matches the SMTP hostname is common practice .
In fact , us mail administrators in particular love it , because except for the people who happen to have their own AS number and own their own IP space , it pretty much requires you to involve your ISP or hosting provider to get the entry setup .
Which pretty much guarantees that those people have an ISP that knows you are running a mail server .
Checking that your SMTP server 's HELO/EHLO broadcast matches it 's rdns lookup is one of my favorite checks in my mail gateways , since it 's low cost ( simple DNS query , easily cached ) and very effective at weeding out people who maybe should n't be running a mail server in the first place due to having the wrong plan with an ISP , or perhaps someone who suffers from ineptitude about how to setup an outbound mail server .
Sorry , those glory days of just opening up a SMTP server on port 25 and sending mail have been gone... for years !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having a PTR record on your IP that matches the SMTP hostname is common practice.
In fact, us mail administrators in particular love it, because except for the people who happen to have their own AS number and own their own IP space, it pretty much requires you to involve your ISP or hosting provider to get the entry setup.
Which pretty much guarantees that those people have an ISP that knows you are running a mail server.
Checking that your SMTP server's HELO/EHLO broadcast matches it's rdns lookup is one of my favorite checks in my mail gateways, since it's low cost (simple DNS query, easily cached) and very effective at weeding out people who maybe shouldn't be running a mail server in the first place due to having the wrong plan with an ISP, or perhaps someone who suffers from ineptitude about how to setup an outbound mail server.
Sorry, those glory days of just opening up a SMTP server on port 25 and sending mail have been gone... for years!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449865</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28471847</id>
	<title>SORBS is connected to spammers</title>
	<author>deananderson</author>
	<datestamp>1245922920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On the "do-not-sell-this-to-spammer" byline,<br>SORBS, MAPS, and Spamhaus have been connected to a spammer called Whitehat.com, aka Whitehat, Inc. Incorporation documents and Annual reports show that Paul Vixie, John Levine, Rodney Joffe and others are directors of Whitehat.  Spamhaus' Registry of Known Spam Operations (ROKSO) doesn't list Whitehat.  Vixie and Rand (MAPS founders, spammers) provides technical and hosting support to SORBS.  SORBS isn't a real spam blacklist, but a revenge list. SORBS is cover for spammers to conduct scanning for abuse, shake down ISPs, and interfere with Whitehat's competitors.</p><p>See related articles at <a href="http://www.iadl.org/whitehat/whitehat-story.html" title="iadl.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.iadl.org/whitehat/whitehat-story.html</a> [iadl.org]<br><a href="http://www.iadl.org/maps/maps-story.html" title="iadl.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.iadl.org/maps/maps-story.html</a> [iadl.org]<br><a href="http://www.iadl.org/sorbs/sorbs-story.html" title="iadl.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.iadl.org/sorbs/sorbs-story.html</a> [iadl.org]<br><a href="http://www.iadl.org/spamhaus/spamhaus-story.html" title="iadl.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.iadl.org/spamhaus/spamhaus-story.html</a> [iadl.org]</p><p>Full Disclosure: I am the official admin for 130.105/16 and 198.3.136/21, which SORBS falsely claims is hijacked. SORBS has made this claim since 2003, and knows it to be false.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On the " do-not-sell-this-to-spammer " byline,SORBS , MAPS , and Spamhaus have been connected to a spammer called Whitehat.com , aka Whitehat , Inc. Incorporation documents and Annual reports show that Paul Vixie , John Levine , Rodney Joffe and others are directors of Whitehat .
Spamhaus ' Registry of Known Spam Operations ( ROKSO ) does n't list Whitehat .
Vixie and Rand ( MAPS founders , spammers ) provides technical and hosting support to SORBS .
SORBS is n't a real spam blacklist , but a revenge list .
SORBS is cover for spammers to conduct scanning for abuse , shake down ISPs , and interfere with Whitehat 's competitors.See related articles at http : //www.iadl.org/whitehat/whitehat-story.html [ iadl.org ] http : //www.iadl.org/maps/maps-story.html [ iadl.org ] http : //www.iadl.org/sorbs/sorbs-story.html [ iadl.org ] http : //www.iadl.org/spamhaus/spamhaus-story.html [ iadl.org ] Full Disclosure : I am the official admin for 130.105/16 and 198.3.136/21 , which SORBS falsely claims is hijacked .
SORBS has made this claim since 2003 , and knows it to be false .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the "do-not-sell-this-to-spammer" byline,SORBS, MAPS, and Spamhaus have been connected to a spammer called Whitehat.com, aka Whitehat, Inc. Incorporation documents and Annual reports show that Paul Vixie, John Levine, Rodney Joffe and others are directors of Whitehat.
Spamhaus' Registry of Known Spam Operations (ROKSO) doesn't list Whitehat.
Vixie and Rand (MAPS founders, spammers) provides technical and hosting support to SORBS.
SORBS isn't a real spam blacklist, but a revenge list.
SORBS is cover for spammers to conduct scanning for abuse, shake down ISPs, and interfere with Whitehat's competitors.See related articles at http://www.iadl.org/whitehat/whitehat-story.html [iadl.org]http://www.iadl.org/maps/maps-story.html [iadl.org]http://www.iadl.org/sorbs/sorbs-story.html [iadl.org]http://www.iadl.org/spamhaus/spamhaus-story.html [iadl.org]Full Disclosure: I am the official admin for 130.105/16 and 198.3.136/21, which SORBS falsely claims is hijacked.
SORBS has made this claim since 2003, and knows it to be false.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28462887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447961
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448949
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447961
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28455189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28472129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448995
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451467
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28452783
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28452217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28460771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447961
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449865
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28454425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28453247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28452121
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450003
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28457115
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447959
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450491
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448033
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28453553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28455483
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28463981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448559
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448695
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447961
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451727
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448033
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_0013215_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448139
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447863
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447835
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449865
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451311
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448171
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450491
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448833
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450637
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28455483
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448559
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28463981
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28454425
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448073
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449741
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449945
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448549
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28452217
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28460771
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450511
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451371
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28455189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28452783
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28453553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28453247
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28452121
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28457115
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447839
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448995
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28472129
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451249
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448111
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447871
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447965
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451727
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448673
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449019
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448565
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451841
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448033
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451455
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450237
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447961
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449167
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28462887
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449321
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448695
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28447959
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450539
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448755
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450045
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448645
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451467
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448949
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448955
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28451359
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448381
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28448543
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449217
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28450003
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_0013215.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_0013215.28449645
</commentlist>
</conversation>
