Dear Matthew, (01)
Your attached notification essentially says that our
(ontolog.cim3.net) system blocked your post, because the gmail server
was serving spam and got publicly blacklisted. Our system, thanks to
guidance provided by Chris Menzel in Dec. 2007, has since been
checking public blacklists, and dynamically block posts from servers
that are on those blacklists. (02)
> [MW] it suggest contacting you (I think). (03)
[ppy] in fact, your should contact Google (not CIM3). (04)
74.125.82.48 which is on the blacklist of sorbs.net (ref.
http://www.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml?74.125.82.48 where I just captured
the attached screenshot) is one of Google's IP's (IP range: 74.125.0.0
- 74.125.255.255 belong to Google - ref.
http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/whois/?tool_id=66&token=&toolhandler_redirect=0&ip=74.125.82.48
). (05)
(18 hours after you sent me this, and) I am actually surprised that
this google server is still being blacklisted (they are usually quite
good at getting themselves off the blacklist fairly quickly!) (06)
For your reference, see:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-admin/2011-06/msg00002.html ...
which cited recent cases similar to yours, and the recommended "fix." (07)
Thanks & regards. =ppy
-- (08)
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Matthew West <dr.matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dear Peter,
> I got this return, and it suggest contacting you (I think).
>
> Regards
>
> Matthew West
> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mail Delivery Subsystem [mailto:mailer-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 08 September 2011 09:02
> To: dr.matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
>
> Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
>
> ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Technical details of permanent failure:
> Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the recipient
> domain. We recommend contacting the other email provider for further
> information about the cause of this error. The error that the other server
> returned was: 554 554 Service unavailable; Client host [74.125.82.48]
> blocked using safe.dnsbl.sorbs.net; Currently Sending Spam See:
> http://www.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml?74.125.82.48 (state 14).
>
> ----- Original message -----
>
> Received: by 10.216.132.210 with SMTP id o60mr364421wei.82.1315468925361;
> Thu, 08 Sep 2011 01:02:05 -0700 (PDT)
> Return-Path: <dr.matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx>
> Received: from MatthewsPC2 (host86-129-160-253.range86-129.btcentralplus.com
> [86.129.160.253])
> by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id
> n12sm3299141wbp.7.2011.09.08.01.02.03
> (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
> Thu, 08 Sep 2011 01:02:04 -0700 (PDT)
> From: "Matthew West" <dr.matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> References: <4E63579B.1070901@xxxxxx>
> <65041.72.83.246.198.1315225127.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <4E64CD2F.7050101@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <4E666D20.1080903@xxxxxxxx><4E66E3BA.6040709@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <4E677CA3.8050106@xxxxxxxxxxx> <8DFE9F122E3441AC9133E59CFAC0C039@Gateway>
> In-Reply-To: <8DFE9F122E3441AC9133E59CFAC0C039@Gateway>
> Subject: RE: [ontolog-forum] Universal and categories in BFO & DOLCE
> Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 09:02:02 +0100
> Message-ID: <4e68767c.8c6ee30a.58a3.ffffd98e@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="us-ascii"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
> Thread-Index: AcxtaQr5lQaQWve8TRW72VAB4dhvSAAERt8AAB+ruLA=
> Content-Language: en-gb
>
> Dear Rich,
>
> I'll give you some guidelines:
>
> 1. Stop thinking of inheritance and specialisation as being synonymous.
> Inheritance of properties can happen through other relationships as well.
> 2. Think in set theoretic terms. So each member of a subset is a member of
> the superset. If a method belongs to the superset, it is not "inherited" by
> the subset, but it applies to each member of the subset because it is also a
> member of the superset.
> 3. Do not override methods in a subset. This is an indication that the
> method did not apply to the superset in the first place (because if it did,
> it would apply to all members of the subset necessarily).
> 4. Be careful to separate out methods that apply to the object represented
> from those that operate on the representation. The representation objects
> are objects in their own right. A method that parses the VIN for a car to
> find the engine size does not operate on a car, but on an identifier.
>
> Not necessarily complete or sufficient, but a start in being able to use
> multiple superset structures without creating inconsistencies.
>
> Regards
>
> Matthew West
> Information Junction
> Tel: +44 1489 880185
> Mobile: +44 750 3385279
> Skype: dr.matthew.west
> matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>
> This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England
> and Wales No. 6632177.
> Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
> Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
>> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rich Cooper
>> Sent: 07 September 2011 17:31
>> To: '[ontolog-forum] '
>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Universal and categories in BFO & DOLCE
>>
>> Dear John,
>>
>> Generalization removes a property or method from
>> the old type to create a new type, while
>> specialization adds a property or method to the
>> old type to create the new type, by definition.
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
To Post: mailto:ontolog-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-admin/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/ (09)
|