Re: Barracuda RBL not in first place

["richard@buzzhost.co.uk" <ri...@buzzhost.co.uk>]

On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 06:39 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> 
> 
> richard@buzzhost.co.uk wrote: 
> > 
> > I have to agree with LuKreme, my overnight had 446 blocked prior to RBL,
> > and only 387 by RBL. Again, noted that 'Barracuda' missed 43, 35 of
> > these Spamhaus caught - so for me Spamhaus is still better than
> > Barracuda. Also, I was sat in on a phone conference at Barracuda last
> > year where the motives were made clear; "Long term we intend to charge
> > for it" (OWTTE).
> > 
> >   
> 
> I personally think it would be a mistake if Barracuda started charging
> for it. I think that as long as it's free Barracuda is generating good
> will. That way they aren't seen as "The Microsoft of Spam" as some big
> company that takes from the open source community and gives nothing
> back. I don't think they will ever be the "Google of Spam" where most
> everyone loves them but how the public feel about a company does make
> a different in sales. So if someone here gets tired of doing it
> themselves they might go out and buy a Barracuda server.
> 
> I know that personally as a small fish in a big pond it works for me.
> I give away a lot of stuff. But I see it as cheap advertising. And it
> works.
> 
I think the key thing that PMO was this spin BS claim:

"Barracuda RBL in first place"

When clearly people have different experiences. For me *Spamhaus* kicks
the butt of Barracuda. If Barracuda leaves stuff behind that Spamhaus
catches, it does not make it Number 1 for me. It means it's done *half a
job*

Factor in pedigree too. Spamhaus will always be trusted by large ISP's
and individuals. Steve Linford has made a personal crusade against spam
and spammers. Barracuda, on the other hand, is owned by a former
spammer, Micheal Perone. It offers white listing to people like Constant
Contact and other *questionable* ESP's, and a 'bypass the BBL' option
for 'customers' of emailreg.org. I don't think you can really compare
the two. It's like trusting a convicted thief to look after your
valuables IMHO.

But this is all *OT* and has no relevance to SA. Why this list was
spammed with an unscientific spin of a claim in the first instance just
shows the dark hand of Barracuda at work.

RE: Barracuda RBL not in first place

["richard@buzzhost.co.uk" <ri...@buzzhost.co.uk>]

On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 09:21 -0700, R-Elists wrote:
> > Richard Wrote:
> > No. Here is why. When someone posts a Barracuda send-up that 
> > is questionable, it will still end up in the archives. It is, 
> > therefore, relevant that any counter argument and supporting 
> > material be archived with it for balance. My follow ups have 
> > been entirely within the context of the post.
> > 
> > As for the childish remarks about my fortune. I'm sat at home 
> > without the need to work, and you are....?
> > 
> > Perhaps if you are interested in the workings of the 
> > Barracuda this may be of interest to you:
> > 
> > http://www.waraxe.us/ftopict-5340-barracuda.html
> > 
> > Let me know if there is anything else I can help you with. I have
> > *plenty* of time and energy ;-)
> > 
> 
> richard,
> 
> thank you.
> 
> i mentioned make "another" fortune so it was *not* a jab.
> 
> it just tells me you really dont read (and more) what you reply to.
> 
> to answer your question, "i am a nobody on the SA list that is trying to
> learn & apply and grow in a productive manner"
> 
> since you brought up the term childish and called my remarks so, well quite
> frankly i wrote that post (as kind as i could) because realistically imho
> you are about the most childish person i have ever seen on a list in close
> to 20 years on the net.
> 
> what is your problem?
> 
> fix it and move on.
> 
> or, if you are going to continue to beat that dead horse, then quit holding
> back and beat that dead horse man. 
> 
> get it?
> 
> seriously, beat that horse or shut up about it already.
> 
> maybe someone else will get sick of it besides the list chastening you took
> recently.
> 
> a lot of good that did.
> 
>  -rh
> 
'rh -> unknown';
You are OT and ranting.
Facts:
Post was not initiated by me.
Post was about the Barracuda 'list'
Post made reference to Spamhaus.
My post was completely in context.

My follow up was in context with these remarks. I'm sorry if you are
getting a little upset about my remarks about Barracuda, but if someone
posts that the Barracuda list is 'great' and 'better' than Spamhaus,
other people have the right to respond to it and follow it up. That is
what *discussion* lists are for. Take your own advice please, move on.

RE: Barracuda RBL not in first place

[R-Elists <li...@abbacomm.net>]

> Richard Wrote:
> No. Here is why. When someone posts a Barracuda send-up that 
> is questionable, it will still end up in the archives. It is, 
> therefore, relevant that any counter argument and supporting 
> material be archived with it for balance. My follow ups have 
> been entirely within the context of the post.
> 
> As for the childish remarks about my fortune. I'm sat at home 
> without the need to work, and you are....?
> 
> Perhaps if you are interested in the workings of the 
> Barracuda this may be of interest to you:
> 
> http://www.waraxe.us/ftopict-5340-barracuda.html
> 
> Let me know if there is anything else I can help you with. I have
> *plenty* of time and energy ;-)
> 

richard,

thank you.

i mentioned make "another" fortune so it was *not* a jab.

it just tells me you really dont read (and more) what you reply to.

to answer your question, "i am a nobody on the SA list that is trying to
learn & apply and grow in a productive manner"

since you brought up the term childish and called my remarks so, well quite
frankly i wrote that post (as kind as i could) because realistically imho
you are about the most childish person i have ever seen on a list in close
to 20 years on the net.

what is your problem?

fix it and move on.

or, if you are going to continue to beat that dead horse, then quit holding
back and beat that dead horse man. 

get it?

seriously, beat that horse or shut up about it already.

maybe someone else will get sick of it besides the list chastening you took
recently.

a lot of good that did.

 -rh

RE: Barracuda RBL not in first place

["richard@buzzhost.co.uk" <ri...@buzzhost.co.uk>]

On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 09:49 -0700, R-Elists wrote:
> i want to publicly apologize to richard and the list.
> 
> although i firmly stand behind what i posted, i should have done it off
> list.
> 
> i ask richard and the list to please forgive me
> 
> thanks you
> 
>  - rh
> 
Don't worry about it - I don't take it personally. You are entitled to
your view and I respect that. 

RE: Barracuda RBL not in first place

[R-Elists <li...@abbacomm.net>]

i want to publicly apologize to richard and the list.

although i firmly stand behind what i posted, i should have done it off
list.

i ask richard and the list to please forgive me

thanks you

 - rh

RE: Barracuda RBL not in first place

["richard@buzzhost.co.uk" <ri...@buzzhost.co.uk>]

On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 08:36 -0700, R-Elists wrote:
> > 
> > But this is all *OT* and has no relevance to SA. Why this 
> > list was spammed with an unscientific spin of a claim in the 
> > first instance just shows the dark hand of Barracuda at work.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> Richard,
> 
> i imagine you are far more knowledgable than me (and others) in most
> respects re: spam filtering and many other things...
> 
> :-)
> 
> yet.... possibly, could you write up the factual stuff inside you re: your
> former employer that is appropriate for public consumption and post it on a
> webpage instead???
> 
> ...and put that url as part of your SIG please?
> 
> then it might keep the beating the doody out of the dead spam filtering
> appliance "horsey" stuff verbosity of it off the list??? 
> 
> ill bet with all that energy you could have developed several things and
> made another fortune by now eh?
> 
> :-)
> 
>  - rh
> 
No. Here is why. When someone posts a Barracuda send-up that is
questionable, it will still end up in the archives. It is, therefore,
relevant that any counter argument and supporting material be archived
with it for balance. My follow ups have been entirely within the context
of the post.

As for the childish remarks about my fortune. I'm sat at home without
the need to work, and you are....?

Perhaps if you are interested in the workings of the Barracuda this may
be of interest to you:

http://www.waraxe.us/ftopict-5340-barracuda.html

Let me know if there is anything else I can help you with. I have
*plenty* of time and energy ;-)

RE: Barracuda RBL not in first place

[R-Elists <li...@abbacomm.net>]

> 
> But this is all *OT* and has no relevance to SA. Why this 
> list was spammed with an unscientific spin of a claim in the 
> first instance just shows the dark hand of Barracuda at work.
> 
> 
> 

Richard,

i imagine you are far more knowledgable than me (and others) in most
respects re: spam filtering and many other things...

:-)

yet.... possibly, could you write up the factual stuff inside you re: your
former employer that is appropriate for public consumption and post it on a
webpage instead???

...and put that url as part of your SIG please?

then it might keep the beating the doody out of the dead spam filtering
appliance "horsey" stuff verbosity of it off the list??? 

ill bet with all that energy you could have developed several things and
made another fortune by now eh?

:-)

 - rh