Unfairly banned, unable to reopen PR

[dotzerons]

Hi,

I must clarify that the assumption regarding rate-limiting workarounds is incorrect. While services like Cloudflare or Let's Encrypt may rely on the PSL, my request is driven by the fundamental technical and security requirements I outlined above (such as cookie-jar isolation and cross-site security), which are the core purposes of this list.

It is disappointing to see a legitimate infrastructure request dismissed based on a previous interaction. Judging a project’s current technical merit based on a past 'bad request' by a former team member is not aligned with the professional standards of a project as critical as the PSL.

We are seeking a fair technical evaluation based on our current compliance with the guidelines. We believe our architecture meets the criteria for inclusion, and we are prepared to take the necessary formal steps to ensure our project is not unfairly excluded due to a misunderstanding of our objectives.

[dnsguru]

There is a response to this in the closed PR. Once the sorting and other issues such as broken registration and delegation links on the legitimate infrastructure that the 1000 customers might use are not returning 404 errors, we are glad to reconsider.

[dnsguru]

#2778 (comment)

[dnsguru]

We are seeking a fair technical evaluation based on our current compliance with the guidelines. We believe our architecture meets the criteria for inclusion, and we are prepared to take the necessary formal steps to ensure our project is not unfairly excluded due to a misunderstanding of our objectives.

Excellent. Let those formal steps be to address the correct sorting position of the request, outline the purpose of the desire to work around the rate limits at Cloudflare and Let's Encrypt, but most crucially, fixing the 404 errors that are present on the registration or delegation pages that 1000 users might be using on the system would help make it more clear that there are 1000 users, as the 404 error pages somewhat undermine the ability to corroborate the narrative put forth.

[dotzerons]

Hi,

the project is not yet launched, it was only tested with 10 websites (1M sites is the target audience) and we saw the issues caused because the whole internet is centralized on your list, every day more issues appears. we will open a new request on launch and if denied we will just tell the crypto community how internet is centralized appart of icann and the risks of using a platform that is not recognized by this list.

thanks

[dnsguru]

The PSL is just a text file that is maintained by volunteers. Any use of the text file is elective, but has grown across decades based upon expected behavior.

It is inappropriate to use PSL to bypass account behaviours - as adding these types of requests diminishes the trust of those downline services about the trust and expectaions of behaviour.

If there are exceptions to account security or behaviors that commercial services using the PSL have made in their systems, it is appropriate to work directly with the commercial services.

Organizations deferring to the PSL inclusion as a solution are shifting the debt onto the plate of overworked volunteers inappropriately, similar to #1245

The pull request was denied because it was violating the guidelines, not just for seeking a workaround to third party limits, but also because as we identified in our review and response that the entry was not appropriately sorted, and also the project appeared to have made at least one misrepresentation in the request.

This project is not the appropriate place to be drawn into controversy for or against decentrallization. It is just a text file.