On 8/5/02 1:23 PM, "Bernie Cosell" <email@example.com> wrote:
> I'm not understanding here. I thought that there were three 'realms' in
> the Internet email world. There's AOL, there's MSN/Hotmail, and there's
> *EVERYONE*ELSE* who just abide by the RFCs and do things normally. Is
> that not a true assumption any more?
No, it's fairly true. Earthlink is pretty compliant, and it's the third
biggest gorilla. If you could get earthlink to buy into something, that's
good, and leverage against the other two, but not decisive.
> -- are there more sites [like
> Earthlink, perhaps] that have cobbled up their own non-RFC-compliant
> little worlds
Oh, sure. Lots of little ones. With the increasingly visible problem of
stupid spam filters, it's getting worse, not better.
What I like are the occasional messages that say "blah de dah <usually spam
assassin, once in a while brightmail> has declared this piece of email of
yours to be spam. How do you plan on fixing this?"
To which my answer is "if they did a false-positive on a piece of non-spam,
why should I fix my system? Tell them to improve theirs". But they don't
seem to like that answer, they seem to think if spam assasin says so, it
must be so...
Chuq Von Rospach, Architech
firstname.lastname@example.org -- http://www.chuqui.com/
Stress is when you wake up screaming and you realize you haven't fallen