Delist this person: From: petsupermarket

[Patrick Barnes]

Victory at all costs?  People have taken that approach before.  We have to 
weigh the costs, benefits, and risks.  Without a great deal of hassle to our 
subscribers, we cannot correct this issue in a reliable manner.

I'm afraid the best thing we can do is set up very harsh rules against UOL.  
This includes rejecting them at mail servers, banning them from everything we 
can, and seeing them listed in as many blacklists as possible.

Now, all of this does little good if no attention is brought to it.  If you 
know someone using UOL, tell them about the problem.  Explain the issue to 
anyone you can.  Also, try to tell UOL using whatever method you see fit, be 
it a simple email or a Slashdot article.  Make them notice.  In time, they 
will have to realize the fault in their way and they'll have to correct it or 
fail.

I've heard mention of people using UOL without this service.  There may be 
people who will suffer as a result, but we should try to make them aware of 
the problem so that they will move to a more reasonable service.  If mail 
servers are rejecting messages from UOL, then the members who do not use the 
broken service will get the notifications.  They will realize that the UOL 
service is faulty, and they will either go to another service or will 
complain to UOL.  If UOL's users start complaining, they might pay more 
attention.

We must do our best to show UOL the problem with what they do.  We must also 
be reasonable in our efforts to resolve this issue.

-- 
Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
nman64 at n-man.com

http://www.n-man.com/

Have I been helpful?  Rate my assistance!
http://rate.affero.net/nman64/
-- 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20060313/c6ad4daa/attachment-0001.sig>