|
Grex > Helpers > #147: Grex System Problems - Winter 2005/06 | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 260 responses total. |
other
|
|
response 154 of 260:
| 
Feb 1 02:58 UTC 2006 |
I'm still not getting Backtalk buttons enabled when they should be.
Jan? Steve (Weiss)?
|
keesan
|
|
response 155 of 260:
|
Feb 1 13:29 UTC 2006 |
From Mailer-Daemon@cyberspace.org Tue Jan 31 22:30:19 2006
X-Failed-Recipients: XXXX@worldnet.att.net,
XXX@att.net,
XXX@aol.com,
XXX@aol.com
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
From: Mail Delivery System <Mailer-Daemon@cyberspace.org>
To: keesan@cyberspace.org
Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 22:30:18 -0500
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:
XXX@worldnet.att.net
SMTP error from remote mail server after MAIL FROM:<keesan@cyberspace.org>
SIZE=3823: host gateway2.worldnet.att.net [12.102.240.23]:
550-216.86.77.194 blocked by blacklist.mail.ops.worldnet.att.net. 550
Blocked for abuse. See http://www.att.net/general-info/rblinquiry.html
XXX@att.net
XXX@aol.com
SMTP error from remote mail server after initial connection:
host mailin-02.mx.aol.com [64.12.138.185]: 554- (RTR:BL) http://postma
ster.info.aol.com/errors/554rtrbl.html
554- AOL does not accept e-mail transactions from IP addresses which
554- generate complaints or transmit unsolicited bulk e-mail.
554 Connecting IP: 216.86.77.194
XXXX@aol.com
SMTP error from remote mail server after initial connection:
How did we get on the rbl list again?
|
mcnally
|
|
response 156 of 260:
|
Feb 1 17:29 UTC 2006 |
It's a different blacklist than before.
|
keesan
|
|
response 157 of 260:
|
Feb 1 20:56 UTC 2006 |
So how did we get onto this different blacklist after blocking new users from
sending outgoing mail?
|
mcnally
|
|
response 158 of 260:
|
Feb 1 21:43 UTC 2006 |
I've no idea and it's not likely they'll explain. Maybe it was the same mail
that we blocked but this list has a longer management cycle and were slower
getting around to blocking us.
Given the profusion of such lists it's nearly impossible to know how they
all work.
|
keesan
|
|
response 159 of 260:
|
Feb 2 02:48 UTC 2006 |
We were blocked by AOL earlier. Can we write and ask to be unblocked?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 160 of 260:
|
Feb 2 03:50 UTC 2006 |
We are still blocked by AOL. I just got a message there returned. AOL
is ubiquitous: e-mail service from Grex is much degraded by a block to AOL.
|
mziemba
|
|
response 161 of 260:
|
Feb 2 05:50 UTC 2006 |
|
naftee
|
|
response 162 of 260:
|
Feb 2 05:50 UTC 2006 |
whoa !
|
mziemba
|
|
response 163 of 260:
|
Feb 2 05:54 UTC 2006 |
OK. Now I'm using a PC with Microsoft Windows XP and HyperTerminal. Same
problem. Despite using the menu system to change the terminal type to VT100,
which is what I'm emulating on my end, Grex registers this and then later
tells me that my terminal type "dialup" is unknown, and therefore won't allow
me to access mail via pine. What's going on?
|
gull
|
|
response 164 of 260:
|
Feb 2 06:42 UTC 2006 |
Re resp:160: AOL's block list is notoriously overzealous and hard to
stay off of. AOL's email service shouldn't be considered reliable by
anyone.
|
keesan
|
|
response 165 of 260:
|
Feb 2 15:28 UTC 2006 |
But unfortunately there are still dummies who use AOL, and I work for one of
them and Jim's brother is another.
|
twenex
|
|
response 166 of 260:
|
Feb 2 15:36 UTC 2006 |
Wow. How unpolitically-correct of you. You're right though.
|
keesan
|
|
response 167 of 260:
|
Feb 2 15:48 UTC 2006 |
Haven't you see any of the AOL for DUMMIES books? Yellow and black cover.
I have also see Weddings for Dummies, or maybe it was for Idiots.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 168 of 260:
|
Feb 2 15:51 UTC 2006 |
There are many, MANY "... For Dummies!" books out there.
|
twenex
|
|
response 169 of 260:
|
Feb 2 15:54 UTC 2006 |
Ah, maybe I took your comment out of context. I assumed you were really
disparaging dummies.
I prefer the "Idiot's Guides" myself. Funnily enough I thought the "for
Dummies" books were more patronizing.
|
keesan
|
|
response 170 of 260:
|
Feb 2 15:56 UTC 2006 |
Idiot implies you are incapable of learning, dummy that you are uninformed
but not unintelligent.
|
cross
|
|
response 171 of 260:
|
Feb 2 16:45 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
marcvh
|
|
response 172 of 260:
|
Feb 2 16:58 UTC 2006 |
Both dummy and idiot imply someone who is unintelligent, although idiot
is a bit more extreme and used to imply a profound mental disability.
The word for someone who is uninformed is "ignoramus."
|
rcurl
|
|
response 173 of 260:
|
Feb 2 17:38 UTC 2006 |
People will admit to being a, say, Unix Dummy, more readily than being a Unix
Ignoramus. The latter, though, is better for identifying someone else.
|
twenex
|
|
response 174 of 260:
|
Feb 3 15:47 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
twenex
|
|
response 175 of 260:
|
Feb 3 15:48 UTC 2006 |
Grex is fixed. Hail Ming! er, STeve!
|
tod
|
|
response 176 of 260:
|
Feb 3 17:36 UTC 2006 |
Thanks for the update on the system downtime!
|
crimson
|
|
response 177 of 260:
|
Feb 4 02:16 UTC 2006 |
From WordNet:
Dummy: 1. a person who does not talk
2. an ignorant or foolish person
Idiot: 1. a person of subnormal intelligence
Ignoramus: 1. an ignorant person
Still, I'd rather be called a "dummy" -- and "wilfully ignorant" is as sharp an
insult as you can give (if you want to do so) in my book.
|
scholar
|
|
response 178 of 260:
|
Feb 4 03:05 UTC 2006 |
/me humps Katrisa's leg
|