++ 24/02/13 23:08 +0000 - Jonathan Baker-Bates:

Yes, we did receive a similar request some time ago. We are not 
going to
block whole Google Groups because of single/rare incidents.

OK thanks Moritz - I'll ignore that then.

Personaly, I would do this different: I'd explain what Tor, why it is important to have Tor around and how the complainer could block traffic from Tor exit nodes if really needed. Ignoring doesn't explain the importance - or, if it does, in an arogant way.

I should point out that the complaint wasn't sent to me directly, but somebody I know saw it on a usenet group and forwarded it, asking whether the Tor community was aware of it.

So as Roger points out, it's not a "routine" complaint, and in fact the complainant appears to know about and understand Tor. The complaint is in fact against Google so I think ignoring it would be the right course of action in this case as I don't want to be caught up in some anti-Google argument, regardless of what the detail of the issues are.

Jonathan

On 25 February 2013 10:52, Roger Dingledine arma@mit.edu wrote:

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 08:15:01AM +0100, Rejo Zenger wrote:

...

I'd explain what Tor, why it is important to have Tor around and how the complainer could block traffic from Tor exit nodes if really needed.

In this particular case, I assume the complainer is "some dude upset about what's getting posted via google groups". So the usual answer (https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq-abuse#Bans) doesn't apply to him, since he can't make any decisions on behalf of Google.

I can see how he'd be frustrated, and how he'd resort to mailing Tor exit relay operators one-by-one in hopes of solving his problem.

But I can also see how it won't solve his problem.

--Roger

---

tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays