From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/55921 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: [Request for Correction]To Gnus team -- Gnus Info about spam Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 08:30:06 -0500 Organization: =?koi8-r?q?=F4=C5=CF=C4=CF=D2=20=FA=CC=C1=D4=C1=CE=CF=D7?= @ Cienfuegos Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Message-ID: <4n1xq6mx41.fsf@collins.bwh.harvard.edu> References: <877k00qmgp.fsf@news.eqiao.com> <4n65fjm1ff.fsf@collins.bwh.harvard.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1073827896 5729 80.91.224.253 (11 Jan 2004 13:31:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 13:31:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M4461=ding+2Daccount=gmane.org@lists.math.uh.edu Sun Jan 11 14:31:31 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Affgg-0004Ys-00 for ; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 14:31:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1Affgf-0007LB-04 for ding-account@gmane.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 07:31:29 -0600 Original-Received: from justine.libertine.org ([66.139.78.221] ident=postfix) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1AffgW-0007L3-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 07:31:20 -0600 Original-Received: from clifford.bwh.harvard.edu (clifford.bwh.harvard.edu [134.174.9.41]) by justine.libertine.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BC273A0048 for ; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 07:31:20 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from collins.bwh.harvard.edu (collins [134.174.9.80]) by clifford.bwh.harvard.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.11.0) with ESMTP id i0BDUCW21284; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 08:30:12 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from collins.bwh.harvard.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by collins.bwh.harvard.edu (8.12.9+Sun/8.11.0) with ESMTP id i0BDU6uB015240; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 08:30:06 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from tzz@localhost) by collins.bwh.harvard.edu (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9/Submit) id i0BDU634015237; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 08:30:06 -0500 (EST) Original-To: Cheng Gao X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6;d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" Mail-Followup-To: Cheng Gao , ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: (Simon Josefsson's message of "Sun, 11 Jan 2004 08:36:02 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3.50 (usg-unix-v) Precedence: bulk Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:55921 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:55921 On Sun, 11 Jan 2004, jas@extundo.com wrote: > Feel free to modify the text again, I should have let you, as the > author, fix it. That's not a problem at all. > IMHO, I think Cheng has a point; using a specific country does not > improve the understanding, I think specific real-life examples are always better than "country X" or "Jumanji." I know hackers have a tendency to be cute, but throwing in a Dilbert reference is worse than an example that I've seen in real life (yes, there are real people that block Asian IPs, and I've argued with them about what a bad idea that is). See the fadden.com URL below for one of many stories about blocking mail from Asia. > and may be perceived as insulting, regardless of the intended > meaning. If imaginary country names are not good, perhaps "a > certain region of the world" or something. OK, but "certain region" lacks specificity, so it's no better than "country X." Korean ISPs have also been known to relay spam. > Or use Norway. ;-) Yes, I could. As everyone by now has understood, mentioning a specific country in that example does not imply an insult to that country. This brings me to the real reason why I was upset by Cheng Gao's comment. He assumes that because I use China as an example country, I think badly of the Chinese (as "morons" in his words). This is simply not true, and I don't want the implication to be that I did something wrong, and now we must change the language because it's offensive to the Chinese. I did not say or suggest that China or its population were beneath anyone else, as Cheng Gao implies. Even if one assumes that I used China because there are spammers there, that does not mean that I or anyone else thinks badly of the Chinese. Actually the situation is more complex. See the following URLs for more information (it's just a sampling, there's LOTS of information on this topic), and then maybe you'll see my point with using China as an example. http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/04/06/chinese.spam.idg/ http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,50856,00.html http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,50455,00.html http://www.fadden.com/techmisc/asian-spam.htm http://www.newhouse.com/archive/story1c050102.html I'm not making things up, and pretending that China does not host spammer ISPs and open relays in the name of political correctness does not change that fact. Ted