From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 1 13:19:04 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA14527; Thu, 1 Apr 1999 12:54:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from numen.elon.edu (numen.elon.edu [152.33.3.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA14520 for ; Thu, 1 Apr 1999 12:54:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (rose@localhost) by numen.elon.edu (8.8.6 (PHNE_14041)/8.8.6) with SMTP id PAA27872 for ; Thu, 1 Apr 1999 15:57:42 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 15:57:42 -0500 (EST) From: Tony Rose To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Return Receipts Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I have recently setup Majordomo at a location that use to have it running, but has not had it working for a couple of years now. I have the latest version running and everything is working well. However, one of the list owners came to me and "warned" me about return receipts. He said that when they use to run it if someone sent a return receipt request to the list that it would bounce to everyone over and over and fill up their queue. So he wanted me to "filter" this. Is this a legitimate concern or is this fixed in the latest version? If this is something to be concerned about still, how do you "filter" it? -tr ________________________________ Tony Rose Elon College Unix/Email Administrator E: rose@elon.edu V: (336)538-6815 F: (336)584-2447 2400 Campus Box Elon College, NC 27244 ________________________________ From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 2 08:20:51 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA28703; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 07:59:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.107.175.229] (dns-west.osti.gov [192.107.175.229]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id HAA28696 for ; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 07:59:11 -0800 (PST) From: Doug_LaVerne@ccmail.osti.gov Received: from mailgate.osti.gov by [192.107.175.229] via smtpd (for honor.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.44]) with SMTP; 2 Apr 1999 16:04:45 UT Received: from ccmail.osti.gov by mailgate.osti.gov (PMDF V5.2-32 #34298) id <0F9K00001KOF2R@mailgate.osti.gov> for list-managers@GreatCircle.com; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 11:05:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 10:56 -0500 (EST) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com Message-id: <0F9K00002KOF2R@mailgate.osti.gov> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Two problems are causing havoc with our lists' readability/usefulness (and no, I'm not asking about specific packages): (1) What causes =20, =B7, =FA etc. to appear at the end of lines, start of lines, or after an indent at the start of a line? Just as importantly, how can Joe/Jo User solve this problem or prevent it if say they're causing it by pulling external material into the message? Setting up test list(s) hasn't worked yet. (2) What causes the user to send out a message, seemingly innocent, (usually with an attachment initially), but to get gibberish results? Again how to solve & prevent? Attachment (gibberish) appears in body. Body often has the =20 =FA gibberish. Example: [Headers] Body ... [Headers e.g. "Boundary..."/"Application"/"Attachment"/ ""/ "...encoding BASE64"] /1dQQ5ALAAABCgIBAAAAAgUAAAC0RAAAAAIAAGUJo3sFcBYhMSF1zi45HgErB2ZF ecUPLEnwFQRPiRz1bWOwZA/9sQRora2eZJq+v4T0QEdixZCdNWD0dJvXt8gW518v [more gibberish] ["Boundary"] Thanks in advance, DGL USDOE Office of Scientific & Tech. Info. List Administration From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 2 14:00:20 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA03224; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 13:46:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from value.net (value.net [204.188.125.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id NAA03217 for ; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 13:46:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by value.net (8.8.7/8.7.4) with ESMTP id NAA25957; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 13:52:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA10150; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 14:02:06 -0800 To: Doug_LaVerne@ccmail.osti.gov cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 02 Apr 1999 10:56:00 -0500. <0F9K00002KOF2R@mailgate.osti.gov> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 14:02:06 -0800 Message-ID: <10148.923090526@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <0F9K00002KOF2R@mailgate.osti.gov>, Doug_LaVerne@ccmail.osti.gov wrote: > (1) What causes =20, =B7, =FA etc. to appear at the end of lines, start of > lines, or after an indent at the start of a line?... I see this same sort of jizz all of the time in mail sent to me from Windoze machines. I asked someone knowlegable about such systems about this once. Apparently, it is just one small tactic in the larger plot of Microsoft to take over the world, slowly, in phases, by being just slightly incompatible with every non-Microsoft protocol and/or piece of software in existance. Well, that's what I was told anyway. I'm just passing it along. :-) But seriously, what I was told is that this extra gunk is in fact some sort of bizzare Microsoft goo, and that if you are _viewing_ messages that have this extra goo stuck onto them from a Windoze machine, you won't even see this ugly extra gunk. Apparently, there is some sort of an obscure configuration setting in MS mail clients that has to be set explicitly to ``no extra jizz please'', and if you get a message that contains this gunk, it means that the dufus who sent it to you just dosn't know about this extra configuration setting, or that he should be turning off the extra goo when communicating with all normal people who have normal (non-MS-goo-enhanced) mail clients. Why Microsoft would ship mail clients with the default setting set to ``yes, generate extra goo that only doesn't look stupid to other MS mail clients'' is a question which probably doesn't require much deep pondering. (And then, of course, Netscape got into this incompatability game too with a default setting in THEIR mail clients of ``yes, generate 500KB of extra HTML for each 1KB of ordinary outgoing text in each mail message.'' Isn't progress wonderful?) -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 2 17:30:00 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA05519; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 17:15:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id RAA05512 for ; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 17:15:35 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 6229 invoked by uid 100); 2 Apr 1999 20:21:12 -0500 Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 20:21:12 -0500 (EST) From: John R Levine To: "Ronald F. Guilmette" cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: <10148.923090526@monkeys.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > (1) What causes =20, =B7, =FA etc. to appear at the end of lines, start of > > lines, or after an indent at the start of a line?... > Apparently, it is just one small tactic in the larger plot of Microsoft to > take over the world, slowly, in phases, by being just slightly incompatible > with every non-Microsoft protocol and/or piece of software in existance. No, it's quoted-printable, a standard MIME type. Reasonable responses are either to ban quoted-printable mail or to run it through a de-MIME pass to turn it back into plain text. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 2 18:12:11 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA06011; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 18:07:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from value.net (value.net [204.188.125.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA05994 for ; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 18:07:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by value.net (8.8.7/8.7.4) with ESMTP id SAA07620 for ; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 18:12:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA17627 for ; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 18:22:36 -0800 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: your mail In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 02 Apr 1999 20:21:12 -0500. From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 18:22:31 -0800 Message-ID: <17625.923106151@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , John R Levine wrote: >> > (1) What causes =20, =B7, =FA etc. to appear at the end of lines, start >of >> > lines, or after an indent at the start of a line?... > >> Apparently, it is just one small tactic in the larger plot of Microsoft to >> take over the world, slowly, in phases, by being just slightly incompatible >> with every non-Microsoft protocol and/or piece of software in existance. > >No, it's quoted-printable, a standard MIME type. Reasonable responses >are either to ban quoted-printable mail or to run it through a de-MIME >pass to turn it back into plain text. OK, me culpa. It isn't _entirely_ just a Microsoft plot. But why is it that MS mail clients are the only ones that seem to generate messages as ``MIME quotable'' (rather than plain text), even when not explicitly asked to do so? -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 2 18:42:11 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA06182; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 18:28:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from ntcorp.dn.net (ntcorp.dn.net [207.226.172.79]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA06175 for ; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 18:28:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (fidelman@localhost) by ntcorp.dn.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09598; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 21:28:35 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 21:28:35 -0500 (EST) From: Miles Fidelman X-Sender: fidelman@ntcorp.dn.net To: Doug_LaVerne@ccmail.osti.gov, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: <10148.923090526@monkeys.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Fri, 2 Apr 1999, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > Doug_LaVerne@ccmail.osti.gov wrote: > > > (1) What causes =20, =B7, =FA etc. to appear at the end of lines, start of > > lines, or after an indent at the start of a line?... > > I see this same sort of jizz all of the time in mail sent to me from Windoze > machines. > > I asked someone knowlegable about such systems about this once. > > But seriously, what I was told is that this extra gunk is in fact some sort > of bizzare Microsoft goo, and that if you are _viewing_ messages that have > this extra goo stuck onto them from a Windoze machine, you won't even see > this ugly extra gunk. It may be that some windows software is particularly bad about this, but what you're really seeing is an artifact of using 8-bit ASCII instead of 7-bit ASCII. Those are "escape codes" used to represent 8-bit characters in a 7-bit character set (the basic Internet email standard only allows 7-bit characters). Mail readers are supposed to convert the escape codes back into the proper character for display. It doesn't always work right - and sometimes requires you to check the configuration of your mail reader. ************************************************************************** The Center for Civic Networking PO Box 600618 Miles R. Fidelman, President & Newtonville, MA 02460-0006 Director of Civic Networking Systems 617-558-3698 fax: 617-630-8946 mfidelman@civicnet.org http://civic.net/ccn.html Information Infrastructure: Public Spaces for the 21st Century Let's Start With: Internet Wall-Plugs Everywhere Say It Often, Say It Loud: "I Want My Internet!" ************************************************************************** From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 2 23:39:35 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id XAA08637; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 23:36:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from windlord.stanford.edu (windlord.Stanford.EDU [171.64.12.23]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id XAA08630 for ; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 23:36:26 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 13140 invoked by uid 50); 3 Apr 1999 07:42:06 -0000 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: your mail References: <17625.923106151@monkeys.com> From: Russ Allbery In-Reply-To: "Ronald F. Guilmette"'s message of "Fri, 02 Apr 1999 18:22:31 -0800" Date: 02 Apr 1999 23:42:06 -0800 Message-ID: Lines: 21 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.66/Emacs 19.34 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Ronald F Guilmette writes: > But why is it that MS mail clients are the only ones that seem to > generate messages as ``MIME quotable'' (rather than plain text), even > when not explicitly asked to do so? Probably because none of their mail servers can handle 8bit characters. :) To add more information for the original question asker, that stuff appears on the end of lines if the lines are over 70 characters (MIME usually decides to wrap about there) or if they contain any trailing whitespace (in which case escaping it is required with quoted-printable). All =s in the message also have to be escaped. The complete gibberish is caused by using Base64 encoding, which should really *never* be used for text/plain and similar content types, but which some really broken MIME generators use anyway. Particularly if there are any high-bit characters. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 3 14:44:49 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA01634; Sat, 3 Apr 1999 14:31:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from venus.communitech.net (venus.communitech.net [216.89.176.51]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id OAA01627 for ; Sat, 3 Apr 1999 14:31:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from thorby ([204.210.106.57]) by venus.communitech.net ; Sat, 03 Apr 1999 16:26:16 -600 Message-Id: <4.1.19990403122815.01136730@mail.rudbek.com> X-Sender: vawjr@mail.rudbek.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 12:29:48 -1000 To: Miles Fidelman , Doug_LaVerne@ccmail.osti.gov, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: "Victor A. Wagner, Jr." Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: References: <10148.923090526@monkeys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I must point out that =20 is valid in both 7 and 8 bit ASCII (well now ANSI) and it's the normal space/blank or whatever you want to call it. so if it's a "7-bit" thing, it's a VERY bad coding error. At Friday 4/2/99 21:28, Miles Fidelman wrote: >It may be that some windows software is particularly bad about this, but >what you're really seeing is an artifact of using 8-bit ASCII instead of >7-bit ASCII. Those are "escape codes" used to represent 8-bit characters >in a 7-bit character set (the basic Internet email standard only allows >7-bit characters). Mail readers are supposed to convert the escape codes >back into the proper character for display. It doesn't always work right >- and sometimes requires you to check the configuration of your mail >reader. Victor A. Wagner, Jr. PGP RSA fingerprint = 4D20 EBF6 0101 B069 3817 8DBF C846 E47A PGP D-H fingerprint = 98BC 65E3 1A19 43EC 3908 65B9 F755 E6F4 63BB 9D93 The five most dangerous words in the English language: "There oughta be a law" From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 4 11:48:28 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA16217; Sun, 4 Apr 1999 11:35:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id LAA16202 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 4 Apr 1999 11:35:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ifolk.iserver.net (ifolk.iserver.net [192.41.44.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id HAA16025 for ; Sat, 3 Apr 1999 07:25:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from librarynt ([160.43.47.9]) by ifolk.iserver.net (8.8.5) id IAA17782; Sat, 3 Apr 1999 08:31:08 -0700 (MST) From: "Tom Neff" To: Subject: quoted printable and de-mime tools Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 10:30:35 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2212 (4.71.2419.0) In-Reply-To: <199904030900.BAA09454@honor.greatcircle.com> X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Importance: Normal Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk (Would it be too much to ask our fellow list manager geniuses to use a better Subject line than "[none]" or "Re: your mail" in here??) The big problem with quoted-printable and other clever mechanisms for carefully preserving vital message content (like trailing spaces on lines and funky Mac quote marks, oooh boy!) is that they look totally hosed in Digest format, no matter how spiffy your mailreader is. Same goes for enriched-text and text-with-bleach and HTML and all the other well-intentioned disasters visited on email lately. Has anybody got a really killer set of de-MIME tools they swear by? One of my goals for this year is to do less rejecting and more transformation filtering on submissions to my lists. Automation r00lz after all. But I'd rather not reinvent the travois pole if I can avoid it. From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 4 12:02:39 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA16147; Sun, 4 Apr 1999 11:34:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id LAA16134 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 4 Apr 1999 11:34:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sol.airfiberinc.com (sol.airfiberinc.com [209.68.254.188]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA05547 for ; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 17:18:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from airfiberinc.com ([209.68.254.184]) by sol.airfiberinc.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.5) with ESMTP id 116; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 17:22:33 -0800 Message-ID: <37056E4D.C59B63D0@airfiberinc.com> Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 17:26:37 -0800 From: "Bill Houle" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug_LaVerne@ccmail.osti.gov CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: References: <0F9K00002KOF2R@mailgate.osti.gov> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Doug_LaVerne@ccmail.osti.gov wrote: > > (1) What causes =20, =B7, =FA etc. to appear at the end of lines, start of > lines, or after an indent at the start of a line? These are quoted-printable characters, which are the 7bit translation of 8bit characters within the text. Mail cannot contain binary characters. Conversion to QP is the nicer alternative to outright rejection. How to prevent? Depends. Some mailers are more prone to allowing such characters (eg, "smart quotes", foreign language sets, etc). It ultimately is a client compatibility problem and a user-education issue. It is not specifically a Microsoft conspiracy as Ron suggests, though MS is one of those mailers that make such things easier than most to do. > (2) What causes the user to send out a message, seemingly innocent, > (usually with an attachment initially), but to get gibberish results? An attachment is usually a binary object, and as I said, binary data is not allowed in email. So the attachment has to be converted to text "gibberish" in order to pass. It will be converted back to binary at the receiving end. Normally, this process is hidden from the user. However, if something is done to make the gibberish un-convertable, the attachment cannot be remade and you will see the unconverted text. Either the body of the attachment was mangled, or the headers that describe how to decode the gibberish have been tampered with. You need to find out what is corrupting the attachment. BTW, attachments in mailing lists are not a good idea anyway. --bill From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 4 19:03:56 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA21215; Sun, 4 Apr 1999 18:52:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.235.116.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA21205 for ; Sun, 4 Apr 1999 18:52:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tpad.squawk.com (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA04698; Sun, 4 Apr 1999 21:50:52 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990404205443.0393abe0@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 20:54:43 -0400 To: "Victor A. Wagner, Jr." From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: your mail Cc: Miles Fidelman , Doug_LaVerne@ccmail.osti.gov, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <4.1.19990403122815.01136730@mail.rudbek.com> References: <10148.923090526@monkeys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:29 PM 4/3/99 -1000, Victor A. Wagner, Jr. wrote: >I must point out that =20 is valid in both 7 and 8 bit ASCII (well now >ANSI) and it's the normal space/blank or whatever you want to call it. > >so if it's a "7-bit" thing, it's a VERY bad coding error. Read the "quoted printable" rules - there are cases where you have to quote spaces to "protect" them. -- That which does not kill us, makes us stronger. That which does kill us makes us smell stronger, after a few days, anyway. Nick Simicich mailto:njs@scifi.squawk.com or (last choice) mailto:njs@us.ibm.com http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html -- Stop by and Light Up The World! From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 6 12:42:33 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA04435; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 12:37:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns0.iticom.net ([207.49.134.248]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id MAA04428 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 12:37:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.162.104.32] by ns0.iticom.net ; Tue, 06 Apr 1999 19:37:30 +000 Subject: New List Manager... help! Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 12:37:44 -0700 x-sender: jenifer@DivineWebDesign.com x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: Jenifer To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Message-ID: <92342745401@ns0.iticom.net> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I've been on this list for a long time, anticipating starting a list eventually. I have an opportunity to take over a list that is already going right now and would like to if at all possible! I need a server that will host "majordomo (listserv robot)" can somebody let me know where I can find one, preferably one that doesn't charge! Thanks ahead of time! Jenifer From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 6 14:27:53 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA05295; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 14:14:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns0.iticom.net ([207.49.134.248]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id OAA05288 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 14:14:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.162.104.32] by ns0.iticom.net ; Tue, 06 Apr 1999 21:14:59 +000 Subject: Another Question... Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 14:15:09 -0700 x-sender: jenifer@DivineWebDesign.com x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: Jenifer To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Message-ID: <92343330001@ns0.iticom.net> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk RE: "I need a server that will host "majordomo (listserv robot)" can somebody let me know where I can find one, preferably one that doesn't charge!" Where do I find the most recent majordomo software? Thanks, Jenifer From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 6 15:28:12 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA06280; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 15:19:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.vnet.net (smtp2.vnet.net [166.82.1.32]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA06273 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 15:19:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lmd.vnet.net (lmd.vnet.net [166.82.1.41]) by smtp2.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA06111; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 18:19:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by lmd.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA10017; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 18:18:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA27072; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 18:18:24 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 18:18:23 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: Jenifer cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: List Hosting Services In-Reply-To: <92342745401@ns0.iticom.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Brian Edmonds maintains a list of mailing list service providers. - http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/edmonds/usenet/ml-providers.txt - send email to majordomo@edmonds.home.cs.ubc.ca with the following line in the body of the message: get faq ml-providers.txt Vivian Neou maintains a similar list of host sites along with additional useful information about mailing lists such as her venerable "List of Lists" and a web page describing various mailing list software packages. - http://www.catalog.com/vivian/ The list host providers offer very wide range of services including: discussion lists, announcement lists, digests, archiving, web interfaced search engines, full service list management, etc. Prices for hosting services range from free to hundreds of dollars a month. To have your mailing list host services listed on these pages contact Brian Edmonds or Vivian Neou . Another list of providers here: http://angus.interspeed.net/listowner/provide.html - murr - From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 7 12:29:38 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA21954; Wed, 7 Apr 1999 12:26:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns0.iticom.net ([207.49.134.248]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id MAA21946 for ; Wed, 7 Apr 1999 12:26:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.162.105.42] by ns0.iticom.net ; Wed, 07 Apr 1999 19:26:34 +000 Subject: Thanks to everyone... Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 12:26:43 -0700 x-sender: jenifer@DivineWebDesign.com x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: Jenifer To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Message-ID: <92351319701@ns0.iticom.net> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I was trying to reply individually, but I got such a large response that I decided to send out one reply to all that have offered their help! Thank you all so much, you are really great! Unfortunately, I have decided against taking over the list I orginally mentioned. I really do appreciate everyones help! Thanks again! Jenifer From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 8 21:42:31 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA14363; Thu, 8 Apr 1999 21:33:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dewey.mindlink.net (dewey.mindlink.net [204.174.16.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id VAA14356 for ; Thu, 8 Apr 1999 21:33:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from l037.abb.dial.paralynx.net ([204.174.29.165] helo=Main) by dewey.mindlink.net with smtp (Exim 2.11 #5) id 10VSyO-0006CX-00 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Thu, 8 Apr 1999 21:32:56 -0700 From: "Mally" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 21:34:18 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: BCC posts being sent to list and others? X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Message-Id: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi :) Is there any way of getting Majordomo to catch and bounce posts to my list that are being BCC'd to other lists or individuals? Because of the sensitive nature of my list, we have a rule against anything posted there being quoted off the list. We've had more than one member reply to a post without snipping the original post in their reply, and BCCing that reply to other lists they belong to. We've only caught these by chance and I'm concerned that more may be going on uncaught. So any help in preventing this by using the config file would be appreciated. I've checked all the headers on BCC'd posts and can't find anything to indicate that they were BCC'd - although I know they were. Also gone through all the info I have on configuring the list and nothing on blocking BCCing there either. TIA Mally :) From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 9 00:42:31 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id AAA16075; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 00:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcp.com (tcp.com [207.126.126.64]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id AAA16068 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 00:34:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost by tcp.com (8.9.0/8.6.10) with ESMTP id AAA04799; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 00:34:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 00:34:07 -0700 (PDT) From: James Lick To: Mally cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: BCC posts being sent to list and others? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, Mally wrote: > Is there any way of getting Majordomo to catch and bounce posts to > my list that are being BCC'd to other lists or individuals? As you've found, bcc does not normally leave any signs in the headers. This is why it is called "blind" carbon copy. Your only hope is if the first mail server mistakenly adds on Apparently-To: header lines, but that server would have to be misconfigured. ---- James Lick ---- jlick@drivel.com ---- http://drivel.com/ ---- From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 9 01:42:32 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id BAA17573; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 01:32:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.postmodern.com (server.postmodern.com [209.157.82.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id BAA17566 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 01:31:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mcb@localhost) by server.postmodern.com (8.8.5/mcb-980201) id BAA00342; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 01:31:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199904090831.BAA00342@server.postmodern.com> From: mcb@postmodern.com (Michael C. Berch) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 01:31:31 +0000 In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: BCC posts being sent to list and others? Cc: "Mally" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Is there any way of getting Majordomo to catch and bounce posts to > my list that are being BCC'd to other lists or individuals? > [...] > > I've checked all the headers on BCC'd posts and can't find anything > to indicate that they were BCC'd - although I know they were. Also > gone through all the info I have on configuring the list and nothing on > blocking BCCing there either. Indeed. The entire BCC concept is that it is in fact "blind" (the "B" in "BCC") to the named recipients. The BCC recipients have been separately delivered to before a copy of the message is forwarded to you, and any evidence of their addresses (or even the existence of a BCC line at all) should have been removed. This is 100% a policy issue, not a technical one. In a technical sense, BCC is equivalent to the author having sent the message to your list, and then forwarded his/her own saved author's copy to others. -- Michael C. Berch mcb@greatcircle.com / mcb@postmodern.com From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 9 03:57:40 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id DAA20838; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 03:54:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dewey.mindlink.net (dewey.mindlink.net [204.174.16.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id DAA20831 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 03:54:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from l005.abb.dial.paralynx.net ([204.174.29.133] helo=Main) by dewey.mindlink.net with smtp (Exim 2.11 #5) id 10VYvl-0005OJ-00 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 03:54:37 -0700 From: "Mally" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 03:55:50 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: BCC posts being sent to list and others? References: In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Message-Id: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, Mally wrote: > > Is there any way of getting Majordomo to catch and bounce posts to my > > list that are being BCC'd to other lists or individuals? > > As you've found, bcc does not normally leave any signs in the headers. > This is why it is called "blind" carbon copy. Your only hope is if the > first mail server mistakenly adds on Apparently-To: header lines, but that > server would have to be misconfigured. Thanks for the help. I think this latest BCC user is using it to get all the members addresses (we keep our Who list locked). However, to quote Black Adder, "I have a plan!" Thanks again! Mally :) From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 9 04:57:46 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id EAA21374; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 04:50:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from euler.central.cranfield.ac.uk (euler.central.cranfield.ac.uk [138.250.48.9]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id EAA21366 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 04:50:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nassau.pegasus.cranfield.ac.uk ([138.250.1.183]) by euler.central.cranfield.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 10VZng-000364-00; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 12:50:20 +0100 Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 12:50:11 +0100 (BST) From: Jeffrey Goldberg X-Sender: cc047@nassau.pegasus.cranfield.ac.uk Reply-To: Jeffrey Goldberg To: James Lick cc: Mally , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: BCC posts being sent to list and others? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Organization: Cranfield University Computer Centre MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I missed the original On Fri, 9 Apr 1999, James Lick wrote: > On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, Mally wrote: > > Is there any way of getting Majordomo to catch and bounce posts to > > my list that are being BCC'd to other lists or individuals? > Your only hope is if the first mail server mistakenly adds on > Apparently-To: header lines, but that server would have to be > misconfigured. Also imagine a world without Bcc. If I wanted to have the effect of Bcc without Bcc on this message, I would just resend my copy of it to other recipients. You will never be able to block or stop things being sent elsewhere. -j -- Jeffrey Goldberg +44 (0)1234 750 111 x 2826 Cranfield Computer Centre FAX 751 814 J.Goldberg@Cranfield.ac.uk http://WWW.Cranfield.ac.uk/public/cc/cc047/ Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice. From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 9 09:27:49 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA24118; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 09:02:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stcgate.statcan.ca (stcgate.statcan.ca [142.206.192.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA24111 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 09:02:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stcinet (stcinet.statcan.ca [142.206.128.146]) by stcgate.statcan.ca (8.9.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA13702; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 12:08:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: by statcan.ca (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id MAA28291; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 12:02:02 -0400; sender wenbing Message-Id: <199904091602.MAA28291@statcan.ca> Subject: Re: BCC posts being sent to list and others? To: mcb@postmodern.com (Michael C. Berch) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 12:02:00 -0400 (EDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, nemesis@paralynx.com In-Reply-To: <199904090831.BAA00342@server.postmodern.com> from "Michael C. Berch" at Apr 9, 99 01:31:31 am From: wenbing@statcan.ca (Bing WEN) Organization: Infrastructure Support, Statistics Canada, Ottawa X-Reminder: Email is unreliable. Please re-send your message, X-Reminder: if you don't see a reply from me in a day or two. X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk you may find the bcc addresses in the sendmail log. - > > I've checked all the headers on BCC'd posts and can't find anything > > to indicate that they were BCC'd - although I know they were. Also > > gone through all the info I have on configuring the list and nothing on > > blocking BCCing there either. > > Indeed. The entire BCC concept is that it is in fact "blind" (the "B" > in "BCC") to the named recipients. The BCC recipients have been > separately delivered to before a copy of the message is forwarded to > you, and any evidence of their addresses (or even the existence of a > BCC line at all) should have been removed. > From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 9 13:15:13 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA26407; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 13:05:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net (scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.120.49]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id NAA26400 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 13:05:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from liszt.com (1Cust215.tnt3.new-port-richey.fl.da.uu.net [63.11.38.215]) by scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA19015 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 13:05:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <370E5D46.C6EDC7EC@liszt.com> Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999 13:04:22 -0700 From: Scott Southwick X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Liszt and Topica Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, Some of you may know me from Liszt (http://www.liszt.com), the mailing list directory, which I've been running since 1995. I've had the pleasure of dealing with many of you over the years. I wanted to tell you myself about something that will significantly impact the world of mailing lists for the better. Liszt has officially joined forces with Topica (http://www.topica.com). I've had extensive communications with Topica ever since their inception, and I am totally impressed with them. They brought many list owners into their development process - they're genuinely obsessed with creating a valuable service for mailing list owners and subscribers. That really cemented my confidence in combining efforts with them. I know that Liszt and Topica together can do much more for list owners and subscribers than either of us could do on our own. I'll continue to work with Topica closely, as an advisor. Anyways. Just wanted to let you know. Thanks to all of you who have used and contributed to Liszt over the years; I think you'll really enjoy the next stage in its development, as Topica starts providing a whole array of new services. I'd be more than happy to answer any questions (mailto:scotty@liszt.com). You can also check out my letter (http://www.liszt.com/topica.html) or the press release on the Topica site. yrs, Scotty Scott Southwick -- scotty@liszt.com Founder, Liszt (http://www.liszt.com/) From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 9 14:00:27 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA26946; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 13:57:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.postmodern.com (server.postmodern.com [209.157.82.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id NAA26939 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 13:57:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postmodern.com (foucault.postmodern.com [209.157.82.5]) by server.postmodern.com (8.8.5/mcb-980201) with ESMTP id NAA02805; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 13:56:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <370E699A.E33D48CC@postmodern.com> Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999 13:57:23 -0700 From: "Michael C. Berch" Reply-To: mcb@postmodern.com Organization: Postmodern Consulting, California USA X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bing WEN Subject: Re: BCC posts being sent to list and others? References: <199904091602.MAA28291@statcan.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Bing WEN wrote: > > you may find the bcc addresses in the sendmail log. In *whose* sendmail log? If user@site1 sends a message to list@site2 with bcc to user@site3, there will be no mention of user@site3 in site2's mailer log, because the bcc existed only in the SMTP envelope (or a temporary header) passed from the mail client to site1's outgoing mailer. The address will appear in site1's mailer log, but that is unlikely to be of value to a list manager at site2 except under extremely unusual circumstances. If someone at another site asked me to research my mail logs for addressee details of one of my users' outgoing messages, I'd probably laugh at them. (Unless there was some overriding legal reason for me to be interested, of course.) -- Michael C. Berch mcb@greatcircle.com / mcb@postmodern.com From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 9 15:58:55 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA28190; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 15:54:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dewey.mindlink.net (dewey.mindlink.net [204.174.16.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA28183 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 15:54:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from l018.abb.dial.paralynx.net ([204.174.29.146] helo=Main) by dewey.mindlink.net with smtp (Exim 2.11 #5) id 10VkA4-0004yb-00; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 15:54:08 -0700 From: "Mally" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, nemesis@paralynx.com Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 15:55:16 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Thank you! Was: Re: BCC posts being sent to list and others? In-reply-to: <199904091602.MAA28291@statcan.ca> References: <199904090831.BAA00342@server.postmodern.com> from "Michael C. Berch" at Apr 9, 99 01:31:31 am X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Message-Id: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi :) Sorry for not responding individually to all the helpful posts here, I'd like to say a collective THANK YOU to all of you who responded to my request for help with this problem. I really do appreciate the time and thought that was put into so many posts. Thank you again so very much. Mally :) From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 9 18:15:44 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA29326; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 17:58:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.235.116.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA29319 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 17:58:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tpad.squawk.com (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA24349 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 20:58:11 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990409204833.03f8d780@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999 20:48:33 -0400 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: BCC posts being sent to list and others? In-Reply-To: <199904091602.MAA28291@statcan.ca> References: <199904090831.BAA00342@server.postmodern.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk My guess is that this is a "disposition-notification-to" or similar situation, and not a bcc situation. -- That which does not kill us, makes us stronger. That which does kill us makes us smell stronger, after a few days, anyway. Nick Simicich mailto:njs@scifi.squawk.com or (last choice) mailto:njs@us.ibm.com http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html -- Stop by and Light Up The World! From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 10 22:16:38 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA18593; Sat, 10 Apr 1999 22:06:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bouvreuil.cybercable.fr (bouvreuil.cybercable.fr [212.198.3.12]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id WAA18586 for ; Sat, 10 Apr 1999 22:06:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 17923 invoked from network); 11 Apr 1999 07:06:26 +0200 Received: from d164.paris-174.cybercable.fr (HELO ?212.198.174.164?) (212.198.174.164) by bouvreuil.cybercable.fr with SMTP; 11 Apr 1999 05:06:26 -0000 X-Sender: dsharp@pop3.cybercable.fr Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 07:04:46 +0200 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: David Sharp Subject: Free services: Where's the catch? Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, I'm new to this list, so forgive me if this question has been asked before. (I've scanned the past four or five months of posts, and haven't seen it directly addressed in that time) What's the catch with these free email hosting services? I'm involved in Jliste, a mailing list for journalists here in France ( - sorry, it's all in French!), and we're currently looking around at possibilities for moving to a new kind of hosting service. We find ourselves faced with a choice between paid services, most of which will involve our costs zooming up towards the $500 a month mark in the forseeable future, and an array of free services such as Topica and Onelist. We have for the moment ruled out a sponsorship arrangement as we would like to remain independent of advertisers. We've instead been asking our members to help finance the list by joining a non-profit organisation, which will also organise initiatives centred on journalism and the Internet. In view of the costs of a paid service - list traffic more than doubled last month, so the Lyris bill did as well - some of those members are telling us: "Why don't you just put the list onto a free service?" Our reply to date has been: A: Because we have made a principled decision not to rely on advertising B: Because we want to be sure that member information remains confidential, and C: Because with a free service there's no guarantee of a reliable service. -- Concerning point A, I note that on Onelist, the only direct advertising placed on the bottom of messages, for the moment at least, is for the services of Onelist itself. (I haven't yet had direct experience of a Topica list). But I don't see anything that would prevent them, if they wanted, from putting ads for third-party products or services on the bottom of messages. -- On point B, Onelist explain in their terms of service that they won't hand out members' email addresses, although they do reserve the right to exploit other info. This sounds ominous to me: they must be exploiting member information in some way or other. -- Regarding point C, I've noticed a few glitches with Onelist services, including not only long delays but lost messages. However opinions seem to diverge on that question. Needless to say, the people advocating a "free" solution are also the ones who haven't noticed any problems. To cut a long story short, I find it hard to believe that commercial undertakings such as Onelist and Topica are spending all that money on server capacity and jazzy hosting features just for the greater good of humanity. So what's the deal? Are we at Jliste crazy to be considering staying with a paid service? If we are, how come the paid services are staying in business? -- David Sharp, journaliste, France Tel (home) 331 42 64 35 94 - (office) 331 40 41 47 92 E-mail ICQ: 16881741 From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 11 05:17:50 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id FAA25105; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 05:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1.vnet.net (smtp1.vnet.net [166.82.1.31]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id FAA25098 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 05:06:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lmd.vnet.net (lmd.vnet.net [166.82.1.41]) by smtp1.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA05290 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 08:08:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by lmd.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA05256 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 08:06:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA01834 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 08:06:50 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 08:06:50 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: List Host Service Providers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Brian Edmonds maintains a list of mailing list service providers. - http://www.gweep.bc.ca/~edmonds/usenet/ml-providers.html - send email to majordomo@gweep.bc.ca with the following line in the body of the message: get faq ml-providers.txt Contact: Brian Edmonds Vivian Neou maintains a similar list of host sites along with additional useful information about mailing lists such as her venerable "List of Lists" and a web page describing various mailing list software packages. - http://www.catalog.com/vivian/ Contact: Vivian Neou Cleo Kiernan at Interspeed Net maintains an unoffical listowner guide which includes a page of mailing list service providers and various mailing list related links at: - http://angus.interspeed.net/listowner/provide.html Contact: Cleo Kiernan The list host providers offer very wide range of services including: discussion lists, announcement lists, digests, archiving, web interfaced search engines, full-service list management, etc. Prices for hosting services range from free, with ads appended to posts, to hundreds of dollars a month. Prices vary with number of subscribers, traffic volume, added features and the level of service. To have your mailing list host services listed on these pages, contact the the folks who maintain the lists at the addresses listed above. - murr - From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 11 05:33:09 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id FAA25081; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 05:04:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1.vnet.net (smtp1.vnet.net [166.82.1.31]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id FAA25074 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 05:04:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lmd.vnet.net (lmd.vnet.net [166.82.1.41]) by smtp1.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA05240; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 08:05:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by lmd.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA05138; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 08:04:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA01820; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 08:04:24 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 08:04:24 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: David Sharp cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Free services: Where's the catch? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Sun, 11 Apr 1999, David Sharp wrote: > I'm involved in Jliste, a mailing list for journalists here in > France ( - sorry, it's all in > French!), and we're currently looking around at possibilities for > moving to a new kind of hosting service. > > We find ourselves faced with a choice between paid services, most > of which will involve our costs zooming up towards the $500 a > month mark in the forseeable future, and an array of free services > such as Topica and Onelist. While I like Lyris software for features, quality and price, their hosting services are rather expensive. Per their web page, they charge a flat fee of $0.001US per item distributed. There are other commercial providers who charge much less. I'll post contact info for list service providers in a moment. > B: Because we want to be sure that member information remains > confidential, and I'm curious about the confidentiality of subscriber info on ALL list service providers. Subscriber lists are valuable. It would be tempting to sell this info. I protect the subscriber lists on my server. I presume most service providers also protect subscriber info. I would definitely ask the policy of any service provider under consideration. > C: Because with a free service there's no guarantee of a reliable service. I doubt there is a very strong correlation between cost and quality. If the free services are making money selling their ads, there is no reason that they could not provide quality service. When you buy bandwidth in quantity, costs are A LOT LESS than a tenth of a penny per item distributed. The unknown is, are they making money. Services who charge for lists may also be unprofitable. > ... But I don't see anything that would prevent them, if they > wanted, from putting ads for third-party products or services on > the bottom of messages. I subscribe to a couple of lists with third-party ads appended to the articles. As long as the ads are short and at the end, they don't bother me much. > -- On point B, Onelist explain in their terms of service that they > won't hand out members' email addresses, although they do reserve > the right to exploit other info. This sounds ominous to me: they > must be exploiting member information in some way or other. Exploiting "other" member info does sound ominous. > -- Regarding point C, I've noticed a few glitches with Onelist > services, including not only long delays but lost messages. > However opinions seem to diverge on that question. Needless to > say, the people advocating a "free" solution are also the ones who > haven't noticed any problems. I doubt that you will find many service providers who are perfect. 100% uptime is extremely rare. 100% delivery doesn't happen on the Internet. Even if the mail is sent to 100% of the subscribers, a small percentage of the mailboxes can not be reached at a given moment. Most often, the delivery problems are at the receiving end. You can not force someone to accept their email. > To cut a long story short, I find it hard to believe that > commercial undertakings such as Onelist and Topica are spending > all that money on server capacity and jazzy hosting features just > for the greater good of humanity. "Free" list hosting services are out to make a dollar. Their main source of income is injected advertising both on the lists and on their web pages. I don't think this is an evil plot as long as they tell you up font what they are doing. > So what's the deal? > Are we at Jliste crazy to be considering staying with a paid service? > If we are, how come the paid services are staying in business? The paid services will remain in business because there is still a market for ad-free or custom services. Either business model can work. Time will tell if both types of service will make it for the long haul. - murr - From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 11 05:48:01 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id FAA25153; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 05:08:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dewey.mindlink.net (dewey.mindlink.net [204.174.16.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id FAA25146 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 05:08:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from l007.abb.dial.paralynx.net ([204.174.29.135] helo=Main) by dewey.mindlink.net with smtp (Exim 2.11 #5) id 10WJ2h-0004ov-00 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 05:08:52 -0700 From: "Mally" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 05:10:28 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/enriched; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Free services: Where's the catch? In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Message-Id: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi :) ~~~wee snip~~~ > What's the catch with these free email hosting services? ~~~'nother snip~~~ > We find ourselves faced with a choice between paid services, most of which > will involve our costs zooming up towards the $500 a month mark in the > forseeable future, and an array of free services such as Topica and > Onelist. Wow! We paid $100. set up and it's $25. a month Canadian for our list - unlimited mail and members and a digest option. We tried Coollist and OneList and one other free list service (can't remember the name) before one of our members (who always wins at poker <) offered to pay the bills for a paid service because of the constant hassles of dealing with the freebie list services. > We have for the moment ruled out a sponsorship arrangement as we would > like to remain independent of advertisers. > > We've instead been asking our members to help finance the list by joining > a non-profit organisation, which will also organise initiatives centred on > journalism and the Internet. > > In view of the costs of a paid service - list traffic more than doubled > last month, so the Lyris bill did as well - some of those members are > telling us: "Why don't you just put the list onto a free service?" > > Our reply to date has been: > > A: Because we have made a principled decision not to rely on advertising > B: Because we want to be sure that member information remains > confidential, and C: Because with a free service there's no guarantee of a > reliable service. All three of your points are the reasons we went for a paid for service. The need for confidentiality is extremely important for the type of list we have. > -- Concerning point A, I note that on Onelist, the only direct advertising > placed on the bottom of messages, for the moment at least, is for the > services of Onelist itself. (I haven't yet had direct experience of a > Topica list). But I don't see anything that would prevent them, if they > wanted, from putting ads for third-party products or services on the > bottom of messages. They can and do put third-party ad's onto messages as footers. Happened while we were there. Don't know anything about Topica either. > -- On point B, Onelist explain in their terms of service that they won't > hand out members' email addresses, although they do reserve the right to > exploit other info. This sounds ominous to me: they must be exploiting > member information in some way or other. In the approx. two months or so we had our list there, the spam mail that our members received really shot up. Much of it from spammers selling products related to the central topic of our list. Coincidence? Same with Coollist if I remember rightly. > -- Regarding point C, I've noticed a few glitches with Onelist services, > including not only long delays but lost messages. However opinions seem to > diverge on that question. Needless to say, the people advocating a "free" > solution are also the ones who haven't noticed any problems. We had nothing but grief when we were there (that'd be about a little more than a year ago - they may have improved their technical facilities since then). Constant break-downs and lost messages. I think we ran more often using a distribution list than we did using OneList whilst we were there. > To cut a long story short, I find it hard to believe that commercial > undertakings such as Onelist and Topica are spending all that money on > server capacity and jazzy hosting features just for the greater good of > humanity. My own personal impression was that OneList was struggling to keep afloat with inadequate equipment and not enough advertisers - at least whilst we were there. However, I recently joined a mail list there for a few months and there wasn't a single break-down whilst I belonged to the list. A lot more lists too than there had been. The archives would worry me though. AFAIK, lists are archived whether you want them to be or not. While it's probably possible to lock them to non-members, many aren't (prime hunting ground for spammers I'd think) - but I don't think it would be all that difficult for someone who knew what they were doing to access those archives. At least IMO. > So what's the deal? > Are we at Jliste crazy to be considering staying with a paid service? If > we are, how come the paid services are staying in business? As far as our list is concerned, we're much happier with a paid service. We get good technical help, no archiving, no break-downs to speak of, privacy (at least as far as it's possible to be private on the Net) and friendly folks we can actually *talk* to if we need advice. :) Mally :) > -- > David Sharp, journaliste, France < > Tel (home) 331 42 64 35 94 - (office) 331 40 41 47 92 > E-mail < ICQ: 16881741 > > From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 11 07:02:51 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id GAA25866; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 06:43:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ntcorp.dn.net (ntcorp.dn.net [207.226.172.79]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id GAA25859 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 06:43:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (fidelman@localhost) by ntcorp.dn.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08815; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 09:38:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 09:38:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Miles Fidelman X-Sender: fidelman@ntcorp.dn.net To: David Sharp cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Free services: Where's the catch? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hello David, On Sun, 11 Apr 1999, David Sharp wrote : > What's the catch with these free email hosting services? > To cut a long story short, I find it hard to believe that commercial > undertakings such as Onelist and Topica are spending all that money on > server capacity and jazzy hosting features just for the greater good of > humanity. > > So what's the deal? > Are we at Jliste crazy to be considering staying with a paid service? > If we are, how come the paid services are staying in business? > >Our reply to date has been: > > A: Because we have made a principled decision not to rely on advertising > B: Because we want to be sure that member information remains > confidential, and > C: Because with a free service there's no guarantee of a reliable > service. These are very good reasons for going with a paid service, and I'd add three more: D. You're stuck with their domain, which locks you in to their service forever (with your own domain, you can change service providers whenever you want), and worse, E. If they go out of business, then you lose touch with your audience (since your list is now in a non-existant domain). This is not an unreasonable fear, since most of these free services are running an operating loss and surviving on their investment capital -- quite a few of them can be expected to go out of business, or F. Your free provider may get acquired by someone else (e.g. hotmail is now owned by Microsoft). At some point, your free provider may start charging - and since your list is in their domain, you'll be forced to go along or go through a painful transition period. That's why we've always paid for our lists, and more recently started leasing a dedicated server on which we host all our lists and web servers - which also gives us a lot of flexibility to configure things like password-protected archives. (actually, these days, my small for-profit leases the server and donates space to the non-profit activities I conduct under the Center for Civic Networking). By the way, $500/month sounds awfully high - most ISPs charge around $30/month for a list, and the one I used for years charged only $5/month (Software Tool and Die / The World, www.std.com). If you really WANT to spend $500/month, let me know and I can host your list on our machine :-) Miles Fidelman ************************************************************************** The Center for Civic Networking PO Box 600618 Miles R. Fidelman, President & Newtonville, MA 02460-0006 Director of Civic Networking Systems 617-558-3698 fax: 617-630-8946 mfidelman@civicnet.org http://civic.net/ccn.html Information Infrastructure: Public Spaces for the 21st Century Let's Start With: Internet Wall-Plugs Everywhere Say It Often, Say It Loud: "I Want My Internet!" ************************************************************************** From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 11 09:32:55 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA27217; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 09:20:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vjs.telephonet.com (vjs.telephonet.com [207.252.88.49]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA27204 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 09:20:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [207.252.88.49] (207.252.88.49) by vjs.telephonet.com with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 2.2); Sun, 11 Apr 1999 12:22:24 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 4.0 for Cray T3E-1200 Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 12:22:16 -0400 To: David Sharp From: Vince Sabio Subject: Re: Free services: Where's the catch? Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ** Sometime around 01:04 -0400 04/11/1999, David Sharp said: >What's the catch with these free email hosting services? First-born child. No, they don't want to take it from you; you just have to name it after their service. Personally, I'd rather have a kid called "Topica" than "eGroups," but that's just me. >I'm involved in Jliste, a mailing list for journalists here in France >( - sorry, it's all in French!), and we're >currently looking around at possibilities for moving to a new kind of >hosting service. In its defense, Lyris.net *does* provide a top-notch hosting service. I have awhole slew of lists there -- a large announcement list and a bunch of good-sized discussion lists -- and they have always done a superb job. (No, I'm not directly affiliated with them, except that I have a bunch of lists hosted there and I really like the service a lot.) >We find ourselves faced with a choice between paid services, most of which >will involve our costs zooming up towards the $500 a month mark in the >forseeable future, and an array of free services such as Topica and Onelist. [..] >In view of the costs of a paid service - list traffic more than doubled >last month, so the Lyris bill did as well - some of those members are >telling us: "Why don't you just put the list onto a free service?" > >Our reply to date has been: > >A: Because we have made a principled decision not to rely on advertising >B: Because we want to be sure that member information remains confidential, and >C: Because with a free service there's no guarantee of a reliable service. > >-- Concerning point A, I note that on Onelist, the only direct advertising >placed on the bottom of messages, for the moment at least, is for the >services of Onelist itself. (I haven't yet had direct experience of a >Topica list). This is also the case with Topica (with whom I *am* affiliated, BTW; I do not and can not speak for them, but I am a technical advisor for them); they insert a single tag line, like "Make mailing lists work for you," with their URL. >But I don't see anything that would prevent them, if they >wanted, from putting ads for third-party products or services on the bottom >of messages. Topica's policy is that they will *not* insert advertising into list messages without your permission. Which, of course, begs the question, "Who in his right mind would *voluntarily* give permission for a third aprty to advertise on his mailing list if he didn't have to?" Good question, David -- the answer is that Topica plans to provide "incentives" in exchange for your opting-in to advertising. The nature of those incentives is left as an exercise for the reader; the point, though, is that advertising on the list will be purely voluntary. >-- On point B, Onelist explain in their terms of service that they won't >hand out members' email addresses, although they do reserve the right to >exploit other info. This sounds ominous to me: they must be exploiting >member information in some way or other. I can tell you that Topica takes member privacy *very* seriously. They have engaged in discussions with several of us on various privacy fronts, to ensure that their membership policies address even the a skittish list owner like me. You can check out their privacy statement here: In short, member information will be used to compile demographics info, but will never be used in any capacity other than that. (For example the demographics info could be used -- in the form of statistical summaries, not individual data -- to acquire advertising on the site.) Topica also allows you to "hide" your list archives from non-subscribers, and also allows you to hide the very existence of the mailing list (i.e., you can choose to *not* have it listed in the directory). In all, Topica takes privacy very seriously. >-- Regarding point C, I've noticed a few glitches with Onelist services, >including not only long delays but lost messages. However opinions seem to >diverge on that question. Needless to say, the people advocating a "free" >solution are also the ones who haven't noticed any problems. I can assue you that Topica has quite a good deal of capacity, including a *lot* of reserve capacity. I am running several active discussion lists over there, including one that I launched even before they went public, and have not had a single glitch on any of them. Feedback from my subscribers is that they love the web interface -- which is good news for me, since I had received scores of complaints about the web interface on the previous hosting service. I had also used OneList about a year ago, and had noticed some glitches at that time. My impression is that they have worked very hard to fix the problems they'd had earlier, and reports that I've heard recently regarding OneList is that the service has improved dramatically. >To cut a long story short, I find it hard to believe that commercial >undertakings such as Onelist and Topica are spending all that money on >server capacity and jazzy hosting features just for the greater good of >humanity. > >So what's the deal? Money. :-) >Are we at Jliste crazy to be considering staying with a paid service? No, not at all. For some, a paid service is the right way to go; for others, a free service is the right choice. It seems to come down to whether you want to pay for the right to not have a "tag line" inserted a the bottom of the list messages, or banner advertising on the web site. For many, that's a small price to pay (or not pay, as the case may be If we are, how come the paid services are staying in business? They are staying in business because they are presumably providing an excellent service (such a lyris.net), and because there will always be list owners who want to have 100% control of everything that appears in messages on their lists and on their web sites. And please don't misconstrue my point -- there is nothing wrong with wanting to have 100% control over the content of your list and web site. But what works or is deemed necessary by one list owner might be entirely unacceptable (or just the wrong business model) to another. It really all comes down to a combination of personal preference and the expectations of your list members. And only you can guage those; we can't help you there. ;-) Best of luck with the list, David. __________________________________________________________________________ Vince Sabio Boy & His Sabre: vince@humournet.com Stop Internet Spam! From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 11 11:33:44 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA28187; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 11:15:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chi.spunge.org (www.spunge.org [209.100.230.195]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id LAA28164 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 11:15:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from window.spunge.org (window.spunge.org [209.100.230.194]) by chi.spunge.org (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA04882; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 13:14:33 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990411131430.009a4b60@spunge.org> X-Sender: spunge@spunge.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 13:14:30 -0500 To: David Sharp From: Benji Spencer Subject: Re: Free services: Where's the catch? Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk David (and others) >What's the catch with these free email hosting services? You know, in a way I asked this myself. Why can't there be a place that will offer just as good of a service, but charge nothing (or very little) The services you mentioned (only knew of onelist) are a business, and are there to make money. Yes, your list through them does contain a little add, but they have the equipment/bandwidth needed (supposedly). However, Onelist doesn't fit everybody. That was one reason I started spunge.org. While the bandwidth is limited (33.6 modem link to the net), I try to provide just as good of a service as those businesses, at no cost. the sacrifice that is made, is the bandwidth, and I am not around 24/7 (I work and go to school besides run spunge.org). I use Majordomo (which I get free) and MajorCool (which is also free), and I think I provide just as good of a service as those who charge (and at times better). It isn't that hard what I do. it doesn't cost that much, however, people really appreciate it, and there is no real reason for charging a large mount of $$$ for it. if only there where more who seen it this way..... benji -------------------->Benji Spencer<-------------------- spunge@spunge.org http://www.spunge.org spunge@ripco.com http://www.ripco.com/~spunge ben@anduin.eldar.org http://www.eldar.org/~ben ** Finger ben@anduin.eldar.org for PGP public key ** ------------------->ICQ # 14089998<-------------------- From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 11 13:03:56 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA29194; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 12:43:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Kitten.mcs.com (Kitten.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA29187 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 12:43:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Venus.mcs.net (dattier@Venus.mcs.net [192.160.127.92]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.7/8.8.2) with ESMTP id OAA12070; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 14:43:21 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by Venus.mcs.net (8.8.7/8.8.2) id OAA34407; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 14:43:20 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <199904111943.OAA34407@Venus.mcs.net> Subject: Re: Free services: Where's the catch? To: nemesis@paralynx.com (Mally) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 14:43:20 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: from "Mally" at Apr 11, 99 05:10:28 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Mally wrote about Onelist, | The archives would worry me though. AFAIK, lists are archived whether you | want them to be or not. That's not true. If the listowner configures the list for no archiving, the list is not archived (though anything already in the archives remains there unless the listowner also deletes it). From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 11 18:03:36 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA01978; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 17:46:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id RAA01971 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 17:46:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 18414 invoked by uid 100); 11 Apr 1999 20:46:18 -0400 Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 20:46:18 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: "David W. Tamkin" cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Free services: Where's the catch? In-Reply-To: <199904111943.OAA34407@Venus.mcs.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > | The archives would worry me though. AFAIK, lists are archived whether you > | want them to be or not. > > That's not true. If the listowner configures the list for no archiving, > the list is not archived (though anything already in the archives remains > there unless the listowner also deletes it). Or unless one of the third party archives decides to do so. Some of my lists are archived at findmail.com via subscribed addresses there. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 11 21:03:28 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id UAA03733; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 20:50:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bouvreuil.cybercable.fr (bouvreuil.cybercable.fr [212.198.3.12]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id UAA03723 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 20:50:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 19533 invoked from network); 12 Apr 1999 05:50:39 +0200 Received: from d164.paris-174.cybercable.fr (HELO ?212.198.174.164?) (212.198.174.164) by bouvreuil.cybercable.fr with SMTP; 12 Apr 1999 03:50:39 -0000 X-Sender: dsharp@pop3.cybercable.fr Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 05:49:05 +0200 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: David Sharp Subject: Re: Free services: Where's the catch? Cc: murr rhame , Miles Fidelman Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Many thanks for the various helpful suggestions I've received. murr rhame writes: >I doubt that you will find many service providers who are perfect. >100% uptime is extremely rare. 100% delivery doesn't happen on the >Internet. .../.... Most often, the delivery problems are at the receiving >end. Agreed. But one of the advantages of a list is that you can use it to compare notes with other members, and thereby determine, in a good number of cases, whether a given problem was the fault of the provider or whether it occurred somewhere down the line. One of the problems with a free service is that it's rather difficult to see what right you have to complain when it doesn't come up to scratch. Lyris sends us warnings whenever their server goes down for maintenance, or they suffer an outage. In some cases, they report problems that we wouldn't even have noticed if they hadn't told us about them. Miles Fidelman writes, regarding free services: > >D. You're stuck with their domain, which locks you in to their service >forever (with your own domain, you can change service providers whenever >you want), and worse, > That's a key point, and one I forgot to mention in my original post. Not only does your own domain give you the flexibility to move, but I feel that it also projects a more professional image. > >By the way, $500/month sounds awfully high - most ISPs charge around >$30/month for a list. ../... The $500 a month figure is an extrapolation on the basis of Jliste's current growth. We got a bit of a shock when the Lyris bill for March came in: traffic had more than doubled, and because of their flat fee system, the bill had gone up in proportion. Given our potential for growth, I can see us hitting that $500 figure quite soon if we stay with the same system. For comparison, I've so far looked mainly at two other services: SparkList , and a Web service provider I know which is on the point of launching its own list hosting service. Two things puzzle me: 1: Although both Web and list hosting services are billed on the basis of bandwidth occupation (either as per volume, or as per number of messages) the rates being charged by these commercial services seem much higher for lists than for Web services. One of the companies I'm looking at throws in up to 50Mb of list traffic per month with the basic Web hosting deal, then charges $US 13 for every 50Mb extra of list traffic. On the basis of an average message size of 3.4Kb, those 50Mb would come out to just over $17 on Lyris's rate plan. Compare this with the average Web hosting service. A lot of providers these days will allow you 5Gb of monthly data transfer - ie 100 x 50 Mb - in a basic $50 package. If I've not screwed up the calculations, that's about 4% of the first figure I quoted, and about 3% of the second. Why such a big difference? 2: I also note that providers such as Lyris offer few discounts for volume. Lyris's offer, in particularly, is desperately linear. Your traffic quadruples: the bill does too. As far as I can see, you need to be ready to hire a virtual server - at $1000 a month - before you begin to see any reductions in per-volume costs. Of the three offers I've looked at closely so far, only Sparklist has a reasonably degressive rate structure. I also find it strange that there are other services which charge a flat monthly fee (in the case of Esosoft as low as $5 a month), but with no volume-related charges at all. I wonder what the economics of those services are? My hunch is that the field of mailing list hosting has not yet seen the kind of competitive shakedown that has taken place in the Web hosting sector. In the latter you're much more likely to find similar for-payment packages pretty well everywhere, alongside free services such as Geocities, which thrust ads at you with almost every click. -- David Sharp, journaliste, France Tel (home) 331 42 64 35 94 - (office) 331 40 41 47 92 E-mail ICQ: 16881741 From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 11 22:18:37 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA04539; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 22:11:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.vnet.net (smtp2.vnet.net [166.82.1.32]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id WAA04531 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 22:11:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lmd.vnet.net (lmd.vnet.net [166.82.1.41]) by smtp2.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA18241; Mon, 12 Apr 1999 01:13:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by lmd.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA29002; Mon, 12 Apr 1999 01:11:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA14570; Mon, 12 Apr 1999 01:11:46 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 01:11:45 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: John R Levine cc: "David W. Tamkin" , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Free services: Where's the catch? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Sun, 11 Apr 1999, John R Levine wrote: > Or unless one of the third party archives decides to do so. Some > of my lists are archived at findmail.com via subscribed addresses > there. Third party archivers only archive free services? I doubt it. - murr - From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 12 17:15:18 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA06083; Mon, 12 Apr 1999 17:04:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from epithumia.math.uh.edu (epithumia.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA06076 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 1999 17:04:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from tibbs@localhost) by epithumia.math.uh.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA19352; Mon, 12 Apr 1999 19:03:15 -0500 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: tibbs@hpc.uh.edu Subject: And I thought Liszt/Tapioca were supposed to be doing it right Date: 12 Apr 1999 19:03:15 -0500 Message-ID: Lines: 9 User-Agent: Gnus/5.070065 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.65) Emacs/20.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Well, I thought I had heard that they were doing things the right way. But what do I see when I check my mail? "Hi, we've added a bunch of your lists to our service without asking." !*&@@$&(*& What is it that these "services" don't get? Ask first and it's OK. Don't ask and I get pissed (in the American sense, not the British). -- Jason L Tibbitts III - tibbs@uh.edu - 713/743-3486 - 660PGH - 94 PC800 System Manager: University of Houston Department of Mathematics "I survived while Ruby died in Jackie's trashy fantasy..." From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 13 12:00:49 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA20704; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 11:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.235.116.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id LAA20697 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 11:53:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tpad.squawk.com (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA19577 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 14:51:42 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990413132006.03498d20@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 13:20:06 -0400 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: And I thought Liszt/Tapioca were supposed to be doing it right In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 07:03 PM 4/12/99 -0500, tibbs@hpc.uh.edu wrote: >Well, I thought I had heard that they were doing things the right way. But >what do I see when I check my mail? "Hi, we've added a bunch of your lists >to our service without asking." !*&@@$&(*& What is it that these >"services" don't get? Ask first and it's OK. Don't ask and I get pissed >(in the American sense, not the British). I'm back to getting daily spam from them. I've written to them and their providers a number of times and am getting nowhere. I believe that we need to see if we can't get topica put into the RBL. The reality is that they have a business that is based on spam, Commercial UBE. -- That which does not kill us, makes us stronger. That which does kill us makes us smell stronger, after a few days, anyway. Nick Simicich mailto:njs@scifi.squawk.com or (last choice) mailto:njs@us.ibm.com http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html -- Stop by and Light Up The World! From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 13 18:15:25 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA24776; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 18:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id SAA24769 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 18:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 10892 invoked by uid 100); 13 Apr 1999 21:06:10 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 21:06:10 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Nick Simicich cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: And I thought Liszt/Tapioca were supposed to be doing it right In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19990413132006.03498d20@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I'm back to getting daily spam from them. Liszt used to be fine until they got sold to this bozo. Anyone know any other good indices of mailing lists. The da Silva and Neou lists are fine as far as they go but they're tiny compared to Liszt. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 13 23:36:07 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id XAA28690; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:26:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id XAA28680 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:26:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.greatbasin.net (mail.greatbasin.net [207.228.35.39]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA28743 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 12:09:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from default (rno-max2-44.gbis.net [207.228.60.172]) by mail.greatbasin.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA00192 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 12:09:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199904111909.MAA00192@mail.greatbasin.net> From: "Jim Poston" Organization: The Information Dirt Road To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 12:09:43 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Free services: Where's the catch? Reply-to: jim.poston@bigfoot.com References: In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 11 Apr 99, at 5:10, Mally wrote: > AFAIK, lists are archived whether you want them to be or not. Small correction: ONElist gives the listowner the option to not keep archives at all. -- Jim jim.poston@usa.net <<< Ever notice how fast Windows runs? Neither did I... >>> From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 13 23:45:31 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id XAA28879; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:29:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id XAA28871 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:29:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tymix.Tymnet.COM (tymix.tymnet.com [131.146.2.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id MAA03129 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 1999 12:26:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by tymix.Tymnet.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA28106; Mon, 12 Apr 99 12:26:05 PDT Received: from tardis by Tymnet.COM (in.smtpd); 12 Apr 0 12:26:04 PDT Received: from romana.Tymnet.COM by tardis.tymnet.com (8.8.8+Sun/SMI-SVR4) id MAA19515; Mon, 12 Apr 1999 12:26:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from romana by romana.Tymnet.COM (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id MAA07476; Mon, 12 Apr 1999 12:26:01 -0700 Message-Id: <199904121926.MAA07476@romana.Tymnet.COM> Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 12:26:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Joe Smith Reply-To: Joe Smith Subject: Re: Free services: Where's the catch? To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Md5: kcgYJteXa2PD5K9aGZlSIg== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.0 CDE Version 1.2 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Vince Sabio wrote: > I had also used OneList about a year ago, and had noticed some glitches > at that time. My impression is that they have worked very hard to fix the > problems they'd had earlier, and reports that I've heard recently > regarding OneList is that the service has improved dramatically. The San Jose Mercury News had an article about ONElist on yesterday's Computing section. Modem Driver / David Plotnikoff talks about the guy to created ONElist. http://www.mercurycenter.com/premium/business/docs/modem11.htm -Joe Joe Smith MCI WorldCom, On-Net Design/Impl, Product Technical Support UNIX and Tech Sup: TYMNET Network, Xstream Packet Services (Public X.25) 2560 N 1st St, MS-5046/746, San Jose, CA 95131 Voice: 408-533-6220 = vnet 854-6220 Fax: 408-533-6702 = vnet 854-6702 From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 00:00:06 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id XAA28675; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:26:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id XAA28665 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:26:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from proxy3.ba.best.com (proxy3.ba.best.com [206.184.139.14]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA27170 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 09:17:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from corp.onelist.com (snoovler.vip.best.com [206.184.132.144]) by proxy3.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with ESMTP id JAA04886; Sun, 11 Apr 1999 09:17:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3710C380.441FE7C6@corp.onelist.com> Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 08:45:04 -0700 From: Mark Fletcher Organization: ONElist X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.34 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, david.sharp@afp.com Subject: Re: Free services: Where's the catch? References: <199904110800.BAA20144@honor.greatcircle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk David Sharp wrote: > > > What's the catch with these free email hosting services? > I'm the Founder/CEO of ONElist. There's no catch. We are primarily advertiser supported. That means banner ads on the web site and text ads on the emails. If you don't want text ads on the emails, you can sign up for our No Ads option (http://www.onelist.com/info/noads.html). You also mentioned that you are a non-profit organization. If you send us some notification of that, we will turn off advertising on your list for free, as part of our program to help non-profits. As to confidentiality, we believe strongly in our users' privacy. We do not divulge email addresses. The demographic information that we request is completely optional. And any demographic information that you provide is only used in aggregate form. Also, please note that we also believe strongly that the email content sent through our service is the property of the people sending the messages. Our terms of service only asks for permission to redistribute the emails through the archives on our web site(and that's only if you specify that your list has archives). We send out over 12 million emails a day and we have a complete set of mailing list features, including advanced features like multiple moderators and monthly/bi-weekly automated mailings. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask. I will be out of the office most of this week, so the best bet for a quick answer is to ask our tech support group, at admin@onelist.com. We have a great tech support team, and they should be able to answer any questions you have. Thanks! Mark -- Mark Fletcher President/CEO, ONElist, Inc. markf@corp.onelist.com From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 00:25:33 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id XAA29113; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:44:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dns.topica.com ([206.111.131.72]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id XAA29106 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:44:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ariel (ts006d06.sjc-ca.concentric.net [206.173.235.18]) by dns.topica.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA15082 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:43:57 -0700 Reply-To: From: "Ariel Poler" To: Subject: recent posts about Topica Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:48:37 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2212 (4.71.2419.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hello, My name is Ariel Poler and I am the CEO of Topica. I am not a regular subscriber to this list, but I was forwarded some of the recent posts regarding Topica, and I thought it was important to say a few words: First, I want to apologize to anyone who received unsolicited email from us that you considered inappropriate. It is definitely NOT our intention to send messages that are considered to be inappropriate (particularly by list owners). On the contrary, we have been working very hard for over one year to build a service that we hope is of great value to the list owner community, and have obtained a great deal of feedback from many list owners in doing so (some of whom I know are members of this list). While I realize this is somewhat ironic, the reason behind the "unsolicited " messages is our strong believe that list owners should control their lists' information. See, one of the services that we are offering is a public directory of email lists. While we have collected the information by working closely with existing public directories such as Liszt, PAML, and Tile.net, we want to make sure that owners are aware that their lists' information is in our directory, and that they have the opportunity to modify it, or even remove it. So we have started to contact list owners to give them such an opportunity. There is, of course, the catch: some of you obviously considered these messages to be inappropriate. So we are faced with the following challenge: how do make sure list owners are in control of the information that we have in our directory about their lists, without communicating with them about it? Our decision was to send one email to the owner of each list giving them the ability, on an ongoing basis, to modify or remove their list's information from our directory. Unfortunately, it is not always possible to determine when a single person is the owner of multiple lists, so some owners of multiple lists received multiple messages. For the same reasons, we have also been sending one email to the owner of a list the first time that someone submits a subscription request to their list through our service. We decided that it was important for list owners to be aware that their lists were in our directory, and that people could submit subscription requests through it. I would greatly appreciate your suggestions on how we can better balance keeping list owners informed and empowered, without sending email that some consider inappropriate. We have received very encouraging feedback from numerous list owners and subscribers regarding the value that we are providing with our directory and related services, so we need to balance this as well, i.e., making sure that we continue to provide significant value added to the email list community. Thank you. Sincerely, Ariel Poler Tel: 415-344-3811 CEO, Topica Inc. Fax: 415-344-0900 620 Folsom Street #300 Cell: 415-613-6098 San Francisco, CA 94107 ariel@get.topica.com _______________________________________________________________ Explore your favorite topic - http://www.topica.com From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 00:30:07 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id XAA28746; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:27:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id XAA28736 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:26:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pneuma.freshwind.com (pneuma.freshwind.com [207.40.103.25]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id AAA06153 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 1999 00:46:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (benji@localhost) by pneuma.freshwind.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id CAA21912; Mon, 12 Apr 1999 02:39:14 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: pneuma.freshwind.com: benji owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 02:39:14 -0500 (CDT) From: "Jenni \"Benji\" Baier" X-Sender: benji@pneuma.freshwind.com To: David Sharp cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, murr rhame , Miles Fidelman Subject: Re: Free services: Where's the catch? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > One of the companies I'm looking at throws in up to 50Mb of list traffic > per month with the basic Web hosting deal, then charges $US 13 for every > 50Mb extra of list traffic. On the basis of an average message size of > 3.4Kb, those 50Mb would come out to just over $17 on Lyris's rate plan. > > Compare this with the average Web hosting service. A lot of providers these > days will allow you 5Gb of monthly data transfer - ie 100 x 50 Mb - in a > basic $50 package. If I've not screwed up the calculations, that's about 4% > of the first figure I quoted, and about 3% of the second. Why such a big > difference? Mailing lists are strange creatures =o) Partially, I'm sure, its a straight supply/demand thing. Web hosting has become easy to do, pre-config'd packages make it easy for virtually anyone (no pun intended!) to offer virtual hosting and lots of bells and whistles with no technical know-how at all. The demand for mailing lists has not been nearly as great, and has generally not been from the same sort of technically challenged audience. Anyone can put up a website, and feel that they've accomplished something, even if it only gets three hits a month (and that's when they log in to check their counter). Not everyone can pull together a viable mailing list. People will charge what they think the market will support. If you cannot or will not run a list for yourself, and cannot or will not use a free service, what are you willing to pay? Economics aside, I've also heard other concerns about running mailing lists. Some providers are afraid of the possibly bad exposure lists can be. What if the client loads his/her SPAM database and uses the list to sent junk mail? The residual nightmare of getting off of various people's "black hole" lists could be frightening. Leaving the realm of paranoia, list servers can be a pain to manage, even if the individual list managers do a fairly good job of watching over their own lists. Error volume is a factor: misdirected mail that users inevitably send from time to time to the server's "main" address rather than the individual list owner's address, etc etc etc. > I also find it strange that there are other services which charge a flat > monthly fee (in the case of Esosoft > as low as $5 a month), but with no volume-related charges at all. I wonder > what the economics of those services are? There are services that do the same for web hosting. They usually have some exceptions or exclusions (strict AUP, for instance). The idea is that if your flat fee attracts enough people, averages will work in your favor since most web sites really only get a negligable amount of traffic. This probably carries over into the world of lists to some extent: lists tend to self-manage their volume. It has been my *general* observation that high volume discussion lists have fewer members than low volume distribution lists, but their total bandwidth consumption can be pretty much the same. There are exceptions... but hopefully the averages play out once again. > My hunch is that the field of mailing list hosting has not yet seen the > kind of competitive shakedown that has taken place in the Web hosting > sector. I think you're correct, but I also really don't foresee it happening anytime soon, if at all. Is this a mass-appeal industry? Hardly. Do the big players, with the potential for big lists, have the $$ to either do it themselves or outsource? Generally, yes. That doesn't breed really intense competition, IMHO. --jenni "benji" baier From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 04:15:17 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id EAA04541; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 04:13:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.bna.bellsouth.net (mail.bna.bellsouth.net [205.152.80.21]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id EAA04530 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 04:13:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marlene (host-209-214-48-150.tys.bellsouth.net [209.214.48.150]) by mail.bna.bellsouth.net (8.8.8-spamdog/8.8.5) with SMTP id HAA03813 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 07:12:33 -0400 (EDT) From: "Marlene Coldwell" To: "List Managers" Subject: UTF-7 Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 07:16:14 -0400 Message-ID: <001001be8668$35d317e0$0201a8c0@marlene> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Can anyone tell me what causes the UTF-7 attachment with certain emails, and HOW to turn it off, please?? I am close to having a flame-fest over this issue, and can't seem to find out what to do to get rid of it. My filters do not catch this as an attachment, as it does not show in the headers. Any advice appreciated! Marlene From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 07:30:37 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA07653; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 07:25:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eis-msg-014.jpl.nasa.gov (eis-msg-014.jpl.nasa.gov [137.78.160.189]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id HAA07643 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 07:24:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Shadow-Castle (1Cust187.tnt14.lax3.da.uu.net [153.37.91.187]) by eis-msg-014.jpl.nasa.gov (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id HAA12911; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 07:24:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990414072436.007f1480@mgsw3.jpl.nasa.gov> X-Sender: kyle@mgsw3.jpl.nasa.gov X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 07:24:36 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com, ariel@get.topica.com From: Kyle Subject: Re: recent posts about Topica In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk [big snip] >I would greatly appreciate your suggestions on how we can better balance >keeping list owners informed and empowered, without sending email that some >consider inappropriate. How about not forcing someone to deal with such e-mail by not putting lists on your service unless the list owner asks them to be placed there? No unsolicited notifications. No need for notifications. No need to spend effort to stop something for which you never asked. Opt out is a cop out. [snip] >Sincerely, > >Ariel Poler Tel: 415-344-3811 >CEO, Topica Inc. Fax: 415-344-0900 >620 Folsom Street #300 Cell: 415-613-6098 >San Francisco, CA 94107 ariel@get.topica.com >_______________________________________________________________ >Explore your favorite topic - http://www.topica.com Kyle From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 08:19:00 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id IAA08249; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 08:13:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id IAA08242 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 08:13:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from solva.ifi.uio.no (1368@solva.ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.20]) by ifi.uio.no (8.8.8/8.8.7/ifi0.2) with SMTP id RAA03460; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 17:12:40 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from thomasg@localhost) by solva.ifi.uio.no ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 17:12:40 +0200 Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 17:12:39 +0200 From: Thomas Gramstad Reply-To: thomasg@ifi.uio.no To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: And I thought Liszt/Tapioca were supposed to be doing it right In-Reply-To: John R Levine 's message of Tue, 13 Apr 1999 21:06:10 -0400 (EDT) References: Message-ID: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk John Levine wrote: > Anyone know any other good indices of mailing lists. The da > Silva and Neou lists are fine as far as they go but they're tiny > compared to Liszt. Here's my list over indices. Additions welcome. http://www.NeoSoft.com/internet/paml/ http://www.liszt.com/ http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/ifla/I/training/listserv/lists.htm http://www.lsoft.com/ http://tile.net/listserv/ http://www.forumone.com/ http://www.geocities.com/Eureka/6146/index.html http://www.webcom.com/impulse/list.html http://everythingemail.net/discussion.html#search http://www.listsnet.com/ http://www.onelist.com/ http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/ http://www.topica.com http://pegasus.acs.ttu.edu/~liwtj/listserv.html http://www.acs.ryerson.ca/~journal/megasources.html Thomas Gramstad thomasg@ifi.uio.no "I'm ON it!" -- Natalie Raitano as Nikki Franco in _VIP_. http://www.spe.sony.com/tv/shows/vip/tbio_nf.html From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 09:33:55 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA08979; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 09:17:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from epithumia.math.uh.edu (epithumia.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA08969 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 09:17:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from tibbs@localhost) by epithumia.math.uh.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA03865; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 11:16:20 -0500 From: tibbs@hpc.uh.edu To: Cc: Subject: Re: recent posts about Topica References: Date: 14 Apr 1999 11:16:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Ariel Poler"'s message of "Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:48:37 -0700" Message-ID: Lines: 38 User-Agent: Gnus/5.070065 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.65) Emacs/20.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>>>> "AP" == Ariel Poler writes: AP> So we are faced with the following challenge: how do make sure list AP> owners are in control of the information that we have in our directory AP> about their lists, without communicating with them about it? Ummm, how about just not putting their lists in your directory in the first place unless they ask for it? This is called "opt-in". It's a good thing. What you practice is "opt-out" which is a bad thing because unless whoever I sent my demand to actually followed it and removed my lists from your "service" I have to go to your server and clean up after you. AP> For the same reasons, we have also been sending one email to the owner AP> of a list the first time that someone submits a subscription request to AP> their list through our service. I don't want anyone doing anything to my lists through your "service". How difficult is that to understand? AP> We decided that it was important for list owners to be aware that their AP> lists were in our directory, and that people could submit subscription AP> requests through it. If the list owner went and added the list to your "service", they'd be aware of it and you wouldn't have this problem. But because you insist on forcing us to opt out, you have this dilemma. And if course, you end up pissing us off to boot. AP> so we need to balance this as well, i.e., making sure that we continue AP> to provide significant value added to the email list community. Thank AP> you. Do not add value to my lists. To me, you are adding profit to my lists. If I wanted anyone to make money off of my lists, it would be me, not you. -- Jason L Tibbitts III - tibbs@uh.edu - 713/743-3486 - 660PGH - 94 PC800 System Manager: University of Houston Department of Mathematics "I survived while Ruby died in Jackie's trashy fantasy..." From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 10:31:00 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA09710; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 10:21:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vjs.telephonet.com (vjs.telephonet.com [207.252.88.49]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id KAA09700 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 10:20:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [207.252.88.49] (207.252.88.49) by vjs.telephonet.com with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 2.2); Wed, 14 Apr 1999 13:22:06 -0400 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 4.0 for Cray T3E-1200 Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 13:21:57 -0400 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Vince Sabio Subject: The Case Against C.A.S.E. Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk CASE: Clueless Anti-Spam Email Okay, so I made up the acronym -- but I've been dealing with enough of it lately that I think I need a shorthand for it. I don't know if any of you have ever been "caught" by a well- intentioned-but-not-terribly-bright automated anti-spam autoresponder, but I am now in the process of dealing with the fallout from one of them. Actually, *another* one of them. I have a subscriber on one of my mailing lists (we'll call him "Subscriber A") whose ISP ("ISP A") has a mail server that is somewhat misconfigured -- it reports the time zone as "-0600 (EST)". (More on this #later.) Subscriber A posted a message to the list, which was distributed in the normal course of events to Subscriber B at ISP B. Now, ISP B has what it thinks is a very clever anti-spam procmail filter: It runs down through all the well-known tests for spam, and if a message qualifies as spam, then the filter returns the message to the sender -- *and* to the abuse@ and postmaster@ addresses at (from what I can see) *every* domain that it can find in the header of the message. Which means that ISP A received a "notification" that his subscriber was supposedly spamming (he wasn't, of course), my hosting site received notification of a spam that was supposedly sent via one of my mailing lists, and a third party who was CCed on the original message *and* his ISP were notified that some unknown person somewhere was sending spam. Oh, and did I mention that the automated anti-spam message threatened legal action? Yeah, that's really helping to stir things up. So now everyone *and* his ISP have been threatened with legal action because someone's mail server is misconfigured. No, stay there -- it gets even better. Now, Subscriber A is completely perplexed about this, and understandably so -- so he fires off a "WTF?" back to the sender of the anti-spam message, ISP B. Very non-threatening, non-flaming; just requesting some clarification so could de-confuse himself. And he did what any heads-up subscriber wouold do in that situation -- he CCed the list owner. So, Subscriber A's WTF message *again* trips ISP B's spam filters, and here we go all over again, except that this time I'm being copied on the anti-spam message, and so is my ISP. (Luckily, my ISP knows me well enough to not go into adrenaline overdrive over something like this.) It is being sorted out, but what really irks me is that ISP B is refusing to admit that he has done anything wrong or that his anti-spam filter *really* needs to have a human in the loop before any threatening messages get sent out. He's blaming everything on ISP A's mail server (more on that #later), and congratulating himself for having such a clever anti-spam setup. Meanwhile, I just want to smack this guy upside his procmail filter. Okay, the fact that ISP A's mail server is misconfigured is bad, but is also entirely beside the point, as is the fact that the use of time zone names ("EST", etc.) instead of numeric offsets has been deprecated in RFC1123, and also the possible explanations why ISP A's MTA is reporting the time zone (not to mention an invalid combination of GMT offset and time zone identifier) in that fashion. ISP A has already responded by fixing the problem. These things happen, but should not result in the kind of situation that we have on our hands at the moment. What remains is the smoothing of all the ruffled feathers -- a task that, once again, I get to have the pleasure of handling, since ISP B refuses to take responsibility and notify the affected parties that it was just a false alarm and everyone can go home and get back to work. The last time I went through the nearly EXACT situation as this one, it took three days for everyone's blood pressure to return to normal -- and ISP B ended up blocking all mail from me to Subscriber B, and I had to route my messages through a different listmom in order to communicate with my own subscriber. (The good news is that this action on the part of ISP B pissed off Subscriber B to the point that he switched ISPs. A token move that probably was barely noticed by the ISP, but was still gratifying to me.) I haven't yet had my mail blocked by ISP B in this case, but he's about as bright as the last one, so it's probably imminent. And I'm wondering how many false alarms it will take for my ISP to drop me a note and ask WTF is going on over there. Did I mention that this is the third such incident in the recent past? Not all of them were misconfigured MTAs, but the end results have been nearly identical. Someone must have posted a notify-the-world procmail script somewhere prominent on a web site for clue-free ISPs. Of course, the problem isn't procmail, but procmail in the hands of idiots. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. And while I'm ing about brain-dead anti-spam filters, I'll throw this one into the mix: I recently went several rounds with a co-listmom's ISP. The listmom was unable to receive bounces and certain types of list server notifications for MONTHS -- they suddenly just dried up one day. While not receiving bounces is not necessarily a terrible thing , the server in this case is Lyris, which handles bounces internally -- so if we're receiving bounces, it's for a specific purpose. (Every once in a while, a subscriber runs into problems with mail delivery, so we have to bite the bullet and route the bounces to ourselves so we can actually *see* what's going on. It's often the only way to deal with an ISP who's claiming that the problem isn't at *his* end. Uh-huh.) So, in some cases, we actually *intend* and *need* to receive bounces. Well, after the listmom contacted his ISP, it turned out that the ISP had come up with a really nifty way of blocking spam -- simply refuse any message that has a null "mail from"! Pretty slick, huh? I tried throwing RFC821 at the ISP, but to no avail. That was several months ago, and the ISP has only recently realized the errors of his ways, and has removed the null return-path block. Chalk one up for the good guys; only took a few months of constant hounding. Well, that's about it. Thanks, I feel better now; I guess I can go back to smoothing the feathers in this latest mess without going unnecessarily ballistic on people who really genuinely deserve it. Meanwhile, what we really need an I.Q. test for ISPs ... __________________________________________________________________________ Vince Sabio Boy & His Sabre: vince@humournet.com Stop Internet Spam! From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 12:47:54 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA11504; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 12:32:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dns.topica.com ([206.111.131.72]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA11473 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 12:31:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ariel (h80.n131.topica.com [206.111.131.80]) by dns.topica.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA30680 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 12:30:40 -0700 Reply-To: From: "Ariel Poler" To: Subject: RE: recent posts about Topica Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 12:35:22 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2212 (4.71.2419.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Importance: Normal Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk A couple of people have suggested that we should not include any list information in our directory unless the list owner proactively contacts us and tells us to do so. I wanted to highlight that we are not building our directory from scratch, but by consolidating information from well known public directories. Several list owners from whom we originally got feedback suggested that we should not contact list owners at all, since their lists were already in these public directories. However, we found out that many owners were not aware of the fact that their lists were in these directories, and we felt it was important for them to know it (plus, we wanted to make it very easy for list owners to modify or delete their information). Probably a bigger issue with an approach that would only include lists whose owners proactively contact us is that we would not be able to offer what we believe is a valuable service to the email list community. Most people agree (I believe) that services like Yahoo!, Lycos and HotBot have made the Web a much better place. Yet those services would not exist if they had only included web sites whose owners proactively contacted them with instructions to be included in their directories. These services don't even give web site owners any notification that they have been included in their directories, or much control over their information. We realize that email lists are quite different from web sites (that is why we are building a service dedicated to lists). Because of this, and of our respect towards list owners and strong believe in their ownership of their lists' information, we decided it was important to contact list owners and give them control over their lists' information - even thought our directory has been built by consolidating previously existing public directories. We realize there is no perfect answer. We are making a very sincere effort at balancing all of these issues in a way that best serves the entire email list owner community. We will continue to do so, and will certainly incorporate your feedback. Thank you. Ariel Poler. From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 13:30:20 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA12028; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 13:15:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gw.tssi.com (gw.tssi.com [198.147.197.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id NAA12014 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 13:15:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from celery.tssi.com (nolan@celery.tssi.com [198.147.197.6]) by gw.tssi.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA15224 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 15:14:34 -0500 Received: (from celery.tssi.com) by celery.tssi.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA23704 for list-managers@GreatCircle.com; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 15:14:32 -0500 From: Mike Nolan Message-Id: <199904142014.PAA23704@celery.tssi.com> Subject: A little list humor for you To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com (List Managers) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 15:14:31 -0500 (CDT) Reply-To: nolan@tssi.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I've been a participant in the Internet Oracle for many years, and I have to share the following Oracularity with the subscribers on the List Managers List. Enjoy. -- Mike Nolan > The Internet Oracle has pondered your question deeply. > Your question was: > > > Oh Great and always-on-topic Oracle, how can we get people on email mailing > > lists to stop posting off-topic? > > And in response, thus spake the Oracle: > > } I saw a movie the other day called "Enter the Dragon." It starred Bruce > } Lee, who was doing some serious kung fu. I counted at least four groin > } injuries. A classic, definitely one to see. > } > } Well, so much for being on topic. Getting back to your question, I can see > } six possible solutions: > } 1. Kill them. > } 2. Nuke them. > } 3. Kindly discourage them, or ask them nicely to please stop. > } 4. Ask the list administrator to be harsher with off-topic posters. > } 5. Just ignore them; maybe they'll go away. > } 6. Live with it. > } > } All of these solutions, however, present problems: > } 1. This is illegal. > } 2. Not only is this illegal, but it kills innocent bystanders in addition > } to the off-topic posters. > } 3. This will probably only make them post more. > } 4. If the problem persists, chances are, the list has no administrator, or > } at least not one who gives a darn. > } 5. They will probably not go away, especially if they are trolls. > } 6. You seem unable to live with it, which is the reason you are seeking my > } infinite wisdom. > } > } So, unfortunately, loyal supplicant, for lack of better words, you're > } screwed. I apologize for any inconvenience this may cause. > } > } You owe the Oracle a 16mm print of "Enter the Dragon" and a projector which > } shall be used to view the film. > From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 15:30:20 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA13464; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 15:28:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dns.topica.com ([206.111.131.72]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA13457 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 15:27:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ariel (h80.n131.topica.com [206.111.131.80]) by dns.topica.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA04829; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 15:26:31 -0700 Reply-To: From: "Ariel Poler" To: "Roger Fajman" Cc: Subject: RE: recent posts about Topica Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 15:31:13 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2212 (4.71.2419.0) In-Reply-To: <199904142200.PAA04124@dns.topica.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Importance: Normal Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Your company does not appear to be paying attention to the responses that > it gets to the messages. I responded to the message I received > asking that > the list (HHSDIR-L@LIST.NIH.GOV) be removed. It's not an appropriate list > for your service and the description is completely wrong. So far I have > received no reply to my message and the list still appears on Topica. It > has been a week to two since I sent in my request. Hmmm... I just searched for this list and could not find it in our directory. I checked with our directory team and they confirmed that the list has indeed been removed. I cannot tell you exactly when that happened, but it was definitely removed from our directory. Please do contact me directly with any other issues that you might have with our service. Addressing the needs of list owners is our top priority. Thank you. Ariel Poler Tel: 415-344-3811 CEO, Topica Inc. Fax: 415-344-0900 620 Folsom Street #300 Cell: 415-613-6098 San Francisco, CA 94107 ariel@get.topica.com _______________________________________________________________ Explore your favorite topic - http://www.topica.com From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 16:19:07 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA13929; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 16:08:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CU.NIH.GOV (cu.nih.gov [128.231.160.111]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id QAA13922 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 16:07:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199904142307.QAA13922@honor.greatcircle.com> To: ariel@get.topica.com cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: "Roger Fajman" Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 19:01:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: RE: recent posts about Topica Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > Your company does not appear to be paying attention to the responses that > > it gets to the messages. I responded to the message I received > > asking that > > the list (HHSDIR-L@LIST.NIH.GOV) be removed. It's not an appropriate list > > for your service and the description is completely wrong. So far I have > > received no reply to my message and the list still appears on Topica. It > > has been a week to two since I sent in my request. > > Hmmm... I just searched for this list and could not find it in our > directory. I checked with our directory team and they confirmed that the > list has indeed been removed. I cannot tell you exactly when that happened, > but it was definitely removed from our directory. It still shows up when I login there, but you are correct that a search does not find it (I didn't try that before). But I don't want it there at all. And it's still a fact that there was no reply to my request to remove the list. That would seem to be the courteous thing to do. From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 19:59:09 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id TAA16428; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 19:58:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell7.ba.best.com (shell7.ba.best.com [206.184.139.138]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id TAA16420 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 19:57:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from cnorman@localhost) by shell7.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.sh) id TAA27094; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 19:56:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 19:56:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199904150256.TAA27094@shell7.ba.best.com> From: Cyndi Norman To: ariel@get.topica.com CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, cnorman@best.com In-reply-to: Subject: Re: recent posts about Topica Reply-to: cnorman@best.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk From: "Ariel Poler" Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 12:35:22 -0700 A couple of people have suggested that we should not include any list information in our directory unless the list owner proactively contacts us and tells us to do so. I wanted to highlight that we are not building our directory from scratch, but by consolidating information from well known public directories. I think you're caught between a rock and a hard place. I would venture to guess (based on talking to Stephanie and my own experiences) that more listowners wish to be placed in public directories without having to apply to all of them than listowners who want say over each and every one. I am in the first category but believe directories should bend over backwards to accomadate those in the latter category. Several list owners from whom we originally got feedback suggested that we should not contact list owners at all, since their lists were already in these public directories. However, we found out that many owners were not aware of the fact that their lists were in these directories, and we felt it was important for them to know it (plus, we wanted to make it very easy for list owners to modify or delete their information). I agree that IF you are going to include lists without asking the listowners first that you should send each of the listowners mail telling them about it. You get more nasty letters this way for sure but it is far better than listing everyone and not telling them. I see two other alternatives, only the first of which has been discussed. 1) Start your directory from scratch and get your listings from advertising your existance (here is a good place). I understand the objections to that one, but I also understand the position of those who consider this the only way. 2) Put everyone in the directory but make it so no listing is accessable by anyone other than your staff unless you get the go ahead from the listowner (send each listowner an email saying how to check their listing (passworded maybe?...or include it in the email) and change it. No response means the listing is not available as part of the directory. Disadvantages include a lot more time, energy, and money to implement and fewer listings overall. OTOH, there would be a pretty high coorelation between email to listowners that bounces and lists that no longer exist or have moved. I'm not saying this last one is the best choice, but perhaps it placates the most people. Most people agree (I believe) that services like Yahoo!, Lycos and HotBot have made the Web a much better place. Yet those services would not exist if they had only included web sites whose owners proactively contacted them with instructions to be included in their directories. These services don't even give web site owners any notification that they have been included in their directories, or much control over their information. This is not quite correct. Yahoo is a directory type service. Each listing is added by Yahoo staff in response to requests from the site owner (or someone else) to add the site. In fact, it's very hard to even get listed these days. Lycos and HotBot are search engines. They do not find mailing lists and add them to a directory. They list websites only (if they have a separate directory type listing I don't know about it...and it would be opt-in). This is very different from listing mailing lists. It can be a pain if you have some pages you want to keep out of the search engines, but webpages are understood to be public while mailing lists are not. Btw, you can keep pages out of search engines by having a domain name, forwarding all calls for pages using the actual address to the virtual address, and using a robots.txt file to keep search engines away from certain directories. It may also be possible via META tags. We realize that email lists are quite different from web sites (that is why we are building a service dedicated to lists). Because of this, and of our respect towards list owners and strong believe in their ownership of their lists' information, we decided it was important to contact list owners and give them control over their lists' information - even thought our directory has been built by consolidating previously existing public directories. The only reason I agree with you here is that your information was obtained ethically from upstanding existing directories. Not all lists of lists do that and it's little wonder many listowners are pissed off enough to want nothing to do with anything that reeks of opt-out. At the very least I suggest you add staff people to the job of looking at listowner requests for changes or removals and make sure no more requests slip through the cracks. Turnaround time should be a day or two. You may have the best intentions in the world but every single slip-up is one more chink out of your reputation. Thank you for joining the discussion. Cyndi (whose main list is in Topica) -- _______________________________________________________________________________ "There's nothing wrong with me. Maybe there's Cyndi Norman something wrong with the universe." (ST:TNG) cyndi@consultclarity.com http://www.consultclarity.com/ _________________ Owner of the Immune Website & Lists http://www.immuneweb.org/ From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 21:44:15 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA17517; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 21:34:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from antiochus-fe0.ultra.net (antiochus-fe0.ultra.net [146.115.8.188]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id VAA17510 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 21:34:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from voyager (d222.dial-1.cmb.ma.ultra.net [209.6.64.222]) by antiochus-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult/n20340/mtc.v2) with SMTP id AAA29787; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 00:33:35 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19990415043402.00b45d48@pop.ma.ultranet.com> X-Sender: stanr@pop.ma.ultranet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 00:34:02 -0400 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Stan Ryckman Subject: RE: recent posts about Topica Cc: ariel@get.topica.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:35 PM 4/14/99 -0700, Ariel Poler wrote: >A couple of people have suggested that we should not include any list >information in our directory unless the list owner proactively contacts us >and tells us to do so. I will add my voice to that number. My list (GS-L) was listed without permission *AND* note that I didn't get any email about it being done, either. I only read about it here (on list-managers) and decided to go check. >I wanted to highlight that we are not building our >directory from scratch, but by consolidating information from well known >public directories. So if I find your unlisted phone number on the wall of a public restroom, I may freely copy it onto the walls of any other public restrooms I can find? Would perhaps be more acceptable if then I tell you where these restrooms are so that you can go there and try to figure out how to remove it? >Several list owners from whom we originally got feedback >suggested that we should not contact list owners at all, since their lists >were already in these public directories. However, we found out that many >owners were not aware of the fact that their lists were in these >directories, and we felt it was important for them to know it (plus, we >wanted to make it very easy for list owners to modify or delete their >information). Did you tell them where you found them listed? Now, that might at least be of some use, so that we could complain to those places too. I myself think that listing without informing at all is worse, but writing individually for permission *in advance* with *no listing* to be the default if you didn't get an answer, would have been more acceptable (and not necessarily spamming). >Probably a bigger issue with an approach that would only include lists whose >owners proactively contact us is that we would not be able to offer what we >believe is a valuable service to the email list community. Gee, I've read lots of spammers' arguments to the effect that if they didn't behave anti-net-socially, we wouldn't be able to hear about their "valuable" service/product/whatever. But you could have made it known in places like this list, and if it's any good or of any use, word would have spread. [snip] > >We realize that email lists are quite different from web sites Then why do you force people to go to a web page for removal? Some list owners won't even *have* web browsers, never mind ones with Java and that accept cookies. (I reluctantly accepted your cookies, but why don't they at least have short expiration dates?) I'm getting sick and tired of people who think that television is better than radio, and therefore I should need to use my TV remote control to turn off my car radio (especially when I didn't turn it on in the first place). BTW once through your maze, I wasn't given any way to remove my list outright, just to "hide" it. I got no confirming mail saying that it had been done either; I guess I'll go back and check tomorrow. >(that is why >we are building a service dedicated to lists). Because of this, and of our >respect towards list owners Doing what you did hardly shows respect. You published OUR information without permission. >and strong believe in their ownership of their >lists' information, we decided it was important to contact list owners and >give them control over their lists' information - even thought our directory >has been built by consolidating previously existing public directories. Would you say that distributing copyrighted material without permission is OK, as long as that you obtained it from someone else who distributed it without permission? Do you believe that laws against receiving stolen goods should be taken off the books because those who receive those goods didn't steal them? >We realize there is no perfect answer. We are making a very sincere effort >at balancing all of these issues in a way that best serves the entire email >list owner community. In what way does listing owners without prior permission help ANY OTHER list owners of that "community?" I think it only helps you. Stan From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 23:29:14 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id XAA18572; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 23:24:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail4.svr.pol.co.uk (mail4.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.211]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id XAA18565 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 23:23:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from modem-62.beryllium.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.136.1.190] ident=cc047) by mail4.svr.pol.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 10XfYg-00053S-00; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 07:23:31 +0100 Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 07:23:26 +0100 (BST) From: Jeffrey Goldberg X-Sender: cc047@arpad.thegreen.private Reply-To: Jeffrey Goldberg To: Vince Sabio cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: The Case Against C.A.S.E. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Organization: Cranfield University Computer Centre MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, 14 Apr 1999, Vince Sabio wrote: > I don't know if any of you have ever been "caught" by a well- > intentioned-but-not-terribly-bright automated anti-spam autoresponder, > [...] Just to say "me too". I have had one similar experience, but I treat anti-spam autoresponders they way I treat any misbehaving autoresponder that comes to my attention when managing lists. (And if it comes to my attention, then it is almost certainly misbehaving.) I immediately unsubscribe the address generating the bad auto response, and complain bitterly to the postmaster at the site with the autoresponder. -j -- Jeffrey Goldberg +44 (0)1234 750 111 x 2826 Cranfield Computer Centre FAX 751 814 J.Goldberg@Cranfield.ac.uk http://WWW.Cranfield.ac.uk/public/cc/cc047/ Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice. From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 14 23:59:13 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id XAA18841; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 23:57:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vjs.telephonet.com (vjs.telephonet.com [207.252.88.49]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id XAA18834 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 23:56:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [207.252.88.49] (207.252.88.49) by vjs.telephonet.com with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 2.2); Thu, 15 Apr 1999 02:57:38 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 4.0 for Cray T3E-1200 Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 02:55:51 -0400 To: Jeffrey Goldberg From: Vince Sabio Subject: Re: The Case Against C.A.S.E. Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ** Sometime around 02:23 -0400 04/15/1999, Jeffrey Goldberg sent everyone: >On Wed, 14 Apr 1999, Vince Sabio wrote: > >> I don't know if any of you have ever been "caught" by a well- >> intentioned-but-not-terribly-bright automated anti-spam autoresponder, >> [...] > >Just to say "me too". I have had one similar experience, but I treat >anti-spam autoresponders they way I treat any misbehaving autoresponder >that comes to my attention when managing lists. (And if it comes to my >attention, then it is almost certainly misbehaving.) I immediately >unsubscribe the address generating the bad auto response, and complain >bitterly to the postmaster at the site with the autoresponder. I agree with the overall approach -- but in this case, a very good subscriber would have been removed from the list, and the ISP is *clearly* not going to do anything about the situation. BTW, in the previous case, the one in which the subscriber changed ISPs, he finally sent me a note when he had switched ISPs to let me know that we could communicate directly once again. He also told me that he had sent a message to a friend of his about the fact that he was unhappy with the ISP and was in the process of switching to a new one. A little while later, he received a message from his ISP, quoting the his private e-mail to his friend, with the words "What's wrong?" at the top of the message. He said that that one really put him over the top -- and gives you an idea of the kinds of people that I've ended up dealing with in these situations. __________________________________________________________________________ Vince Sabio Boy & His Sabre: vince@humournet.com Stop Internet Spam! From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 15 06:59:42 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id GAA26128; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 06:50:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.235.116.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id GAA26119 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 06:50:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tpad.squawk.com (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA23477; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 09:49:54 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990415094732.03ac04a0@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 09:47:32 -0400 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Nick Simicich Subject: RE: recent posts about Topica Cc: ariel@get.topica.com In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Here is the point: UBE/Spamming is never acceptable, no matter what the greater good served. Floods, fires, starving or missing children, wars, disease, death, pestilence, etc., none of these justify UBE. IMPORTANT things like this happen every day. And I believe that the net standard is that UBE is unacceptable, no matter what the content of the message. Compared to the above world shaking political events, whether your business succeeds or fails and whether you do a little good for list owners or a lot of good for list owners and users is, unfortunately, a small thing. It is up to you to define a business model that does not use Spam as one of its linchpins. If you can't, your business is not acceptable by net standards and should not exist. As someone posted here the last time we went around on this (and convinced me), you don't define UBE by content, you define it by behavior. Failure to do that puts you into free speech issues and that simply does not work. What is you behavior? You are generating messages robotically. They are being generated from a list of harvested (and, I assume, imputed) e-mail addresses. You are sending them to a lot of people. You are sending them to people who have not established a relationship with you or your company and asked for these messages. (The rate that you are sending them at, how many any individual gets, and/or what triggers them is immaterial). You are therefore sending UBE/Spam. It happens to be commercial UBE. You are in a business and the mail is being sent to promote your business. At 12:35 PM 4/14/99 -0700, Ariel Poler is said to have written: >Probably a bigger issue with an approach that would only include lists whose >owners proactively contact us is that we would not be able to offer what we >believe is a valuable service to the email list community. Most people agree >(I believe) that services like Yahoo!, Lycos and HotBot have made the Web a >much better place. Yet those services would not exist if they had only >included web sites whose owners proactively contacted them with instructions >to be included in their directories. These services don't even give web site >owners any notification that they have been included in their directories, >or much control over their information. The assertion that Yahoo, etc, would not exist unless people contacted them to list is interesting, but, I believe, untrue. Last I heard, lots of people make money by submitting your site to search engines. I get several spams per week on this subject...if search engine submission was required, (as opposed to search engine spidering), then people would likely be even more vigorous about this submission. There would probably be sites that made it through advertising that provided the service of submission..... At first, I believed that the gathering of this mailing list information was bad. I now believe I was wrong. I put the information about these lists into a publicly accessible autoresponder. The fact that someone indexes it is no different than someone indexing a web page. >We realize that email lists are quite different from web sites (that is why >we are building a service dedicated to lists). Because of this, and of our >respect towards list owners and strong believe in their ownership of their >lists' information, we decided it was important to contact list owners and >give them control over their lists' information - even thought our directory >has been built by consolidating previously existing public directories. Where you got the original listings from is totally irrelevant. But let's break from the this and look at what you are, in fact, trying to do with your UBE. The UBE is *not* simply a notification. It is a solicitation. You want people to enable their list to work with your service. Let's quote from a spam I got from you a while back: |One of our users has subscribed to your list from the Topica Directory |of Email Lists. We would like to offer this subscriber, as well as |future subscribers to your list, the ability to read your lists's |messages through our web site. In other words, this has nothing to do with notification, and everything to do with your trying to get me to give permission for you to use my compilation copyright. Thus, I think you are attempting, to put it charitably, to cloud the waters with your last paragraph. You are attempting to establish a business relationship with the list owner. Notification is not the issue. Spam is the issue. >We realize there is no perfect answer. We are making a very sincere effort >at balancing all of these issues in a way that best serves the entire email >list owner community. We will continue to do so, and will certainly >incorporate your feedback. Thank you. I want to know how you define your unsolicited, robotic attempts to get me to sign up with you as anything other than spam. Can you give me any definition of spam that anyone other than a spammer could agree with that would include other robotically generated solicitations but would not include yours? Is my -owner address somehow subject to spamming while my individual address is not? I do not buy that. The only model I could suggest would be that you could index people's lists and wait for them to contact you to OK your bulk e-mail or your interfacing with their lists. Of course, this would significantly slow the start of your business. If it can't stand that slower start, you need to re-examine your business model. And, frankly, if you don't redefine your business model to exclude spamming, then I would support adding topica to the RBL. -- That which does not kill us, makes us stronger. That which does kill us makes us smell stronger, after a few days, anyway. Nick Simicich mailto:njs@scifi.squawk.com or (last choice) mailto:njs@us.ibm.com http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html -- Stop by and Light Up The World! From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 15 11:45:47 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA29376; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:40:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net (swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.120.123]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id LAA29367 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:40:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from liszt.com (sdn-ar-003casfraP050.dialsprint.net [158.252.210.52]) by swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA03528 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:39:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3716322F.C786D928@liszt.com> Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:38:41 -0700 From: Scott Southwick X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: On "Opt-out" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi All, >From the day I started Liszt in 1995, Liszt has been an 'opt-out' robot. We always trumpeted this fact: for the first three years, Liszt's main About/Help/FAQ page, linked to from every page of Liszt, began with the words, "Liszt is basically a mailing list spider. It queries servers from around the globe and compiles the results into one directory..." The rest of the page goes on to explain Liszt's opt-out methods and policies. During this time, Liszt was used millions of times by millions of individuals, featured on PBS and MSNBC, written up in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today and the New York Times, awarded Infoseek's highest rating and Excite's highest rating and named a Yahoo Pick of the Day and of the Week and even of the Year (1996), and recently named one of Yahoo Internet Life's '10 Net Essentials'. During this whole period, the ethics of Liszt's methods were never questioned in a public forum, to my knowledge. Nor does that surprise me. The right of Internet directories' spiders to collect and dispense information from servers has been long-established. Those of us who were around before 1995 will remember the consternation Webcrawler originally caused. People used to write in to forums much like this one, outraged: "How dare they index my web page?" Eventually, after being hashed out in forums just like this one, it was settled. People can use the 'robots.txt' file to block ethical spiders. And now the whole argument seems, well, kind of quaint. But at the time - boy, were people mad, and their argument seemed compelling. Lest you want to dismiss the analogy as apples and oranges - mailing lists being potentially more sensitive than web pages - think for a moment what the other classic 'opt-out' web service, Deja News, does: it sucks up everything everybody says on any corner of Usenet and keeps it on the web forever! Now, you better believe people used to question that, too, even though it's beyond question now - and that's so much more in-your-face than what Liszt does. Liszt just reports the existence of various mailing lists, and how to subscribe, as reported by various list servers around the world. The analogy I always used for Liszt's robot: say a fraternal order in a small town puts 'Meets 8pm Every Tuesday' on a sign in front of their clubhouse. A zealous newspaper editor includes that meeting in his 'Weekly Events Calendar'. Now, the members of that order are more than welcome to ask the editor to remove his listing, and of course he will; if they're really that concerned about their meeting's privacy, they might also consider taking the sign down. But if they tell the editor, "How DARE you list this meeting..." Well, the editor is going to be left scratching his head at that one. Anyways. I do not and cannot speak for Topica, Liszt or anybody but myself at this point. But I didn't feel like sitting on my hands, either. Again: if you like Liszt, I think you're going to love Topica. If you've ever been to visit them (and I've spent countless hours with them) you know that they're a terrific organization, through-and-through. The level of concern, politeness and openness Ariel's shown in his recent posts here is (IMO) quite genuine, and quite characteristic of the whole company. yrs, Scotty From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 15 15:44:18 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA02178; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 15:43:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gsp.org (rsk.itw.com [208.211.3.21]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA02171 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 15:43:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsk@localhost) by gsp.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA24643; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:43:54 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:43:48 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: Nick Simicich , ariel@get.topica.com Subject: Re: recent posts about Topica Message-ID: <19990415184348.A24572@gsp.org> References: <3.0.5.32.19990415094732.03ac04a0@127.0.0.1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19990415094732.03ac04a0@127.0.0.1>; from Nick Simicich on Thu, Apr 15, 1999 at 09:47:32AM -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, Apr 15, 1999 at 09:47:32AM -0400, Nick Simicich wrote: > Here is the point: UBE/Spamming is never acceptable, no matter what the > greater good served. Floods, fires, starving or missing children, wars, > disease, death, pestilence, etc., none of these justify UBE. IMPORTANT > things like this happen every day. And I believe that the net standard is > that UBE is unacceptable, no matter what the content of the message. I couldn't agree more enthusiastically with what Nick has said here. There are NO excuses for UBE of any kind under any circumstances, and that includes those where people claim to be performing some sort of "service to the Internet community". (Ironically, the transparency of these false claims usually escapes those who are making them.) > It is up to you to define a business model that does not use Spam as > one of its linchpins. If you can't, your business is not acceptable by > net standards and should not exist. Also extremely accurate and well-put. I don't mind if people want to start businesses that make money from the 'net; heck, I've made *my* living from the 'net in part or full since 1981. But if the business model requires UBE, then the business model is broken, and the business itself will be targeted for blacklisting just as any other spammer will be. ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk@gsp.org From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 15 15:59:13 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA02308; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 15:49:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA02301 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 15:48:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA24324 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 15:49:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA19244 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 16:00:51 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: On "Opt-out" In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:38:41 -0700. <3716322F.C786D928@liszt.com> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 15:59:36 -0700 Message-ID: <19235.924217176@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <3716322F.C786D928@liszt.com>, Scott Southwick wrote: >>From the day I started Liszt in 1995, Liszt has been an 'opt-out' robot. >We always trumpeted this fact: for the first three years, Liszt's main >About/Help/FAQ page, linked to from every page of Liszt, began with the >words, "Liszt is basically a mailing list spider. It queries servers >from around the globe and compiles the results into one directory..." >The rest of the page goes on to explain Liszt's opt-out methods and >policies. > >During this time, Liszt was used millions of times by millions of >individuals, featured on PBS and MSNBC, written up in the Wall Street >Journal and USA Today and the New York Times, awarded Infoseek's highest >rating and Excite's highest rating and named a Yahoo Pick of the Day and >of the Week and even of the Year (1996), and recently named one of Yahoo >Internet Life's '10 Net Essentials'. During this whole period, the >ethics of Liszt's methods were never questioned in a public forum, to my >knowledge. > >Nor does that surprise me. The right of Internet directories' spiders to >collect and dispense information from servers has been long-established. >Those of us who were around before 1995 will remember the consternation >Webcrawler originally caused. People used to write in to forums much >like this one, outraged: "How dare they index my web page?" Yep. It's funny (and interesting) how the edges of what is considered acceptable on the net change and evolve over time. >Eventually, after being hashed out in forums just like this one, it was >settled. People can use the 'robots.txt' file to block ethical spiders. >And now the whole argument seems, well, kind of quaint. But at the time >- boy, were people mad, and their argument seemed compelling. Although the argument about web indexing was put to rest some long time ago, that resolution, hard fought as it was, merely shifted the position of the outer edge of what is commonly considered acceptable in the current era. But the arguments about where this fine line should properly lie can and do continue. For an example of one thing that some people, at least, apparently feel is pushing the (current) edge of the envelope, please see http://www.imrss.org/. (I should say also that I fully expect that the debate over this project, like the debate about web calatoging before it, will someday pass quietly away into the history books, and will likewise be considered ``quaint'' when viewed from some future vantage point.) >Lest you want to dismiss the analogy as apples and oranges - mailing >lists being potentially more sensitive than web pages - think for a >moment what the other classic 'opt-out' web service, Deja News, does: it >sucks up everything everybody says on any corner of Usenet and keeps it >on the web forever! Now, you better believe people used to question >that, too, even though it's beyond question now - and that's so much >more in-your-face than what Liszt does. Liszt just reports the existence >of various mailing lists, and how to subscribe, as reported by various >list servers around the world. The data that is being collected and disseminated by the IMRSS Project may or may not be considered as being very much ``in your face'', depending upon your point of view and (most probably) upon the current configuration details of your own local mail server. Some will undoubtedly consider it less ``in your face'' than (for example) what DejaNews and/or Liszt do, while others will most certainly consider it moreso. This will certainly be a function of both personal outlook and also of the customs prevaling on the net at any given moment in history. In any case, the IMRSS Project almost certainly has relevance to the subscriber base of this particular mailing list, and this seemed like both an opportune moment and context in which to mention it to y'all. It certainly represents yet another sort of cataloging activity of information and/or resources that are available to the public at large via the Internet, _and_ one that has gotten a few people, at least, rather up in arms about the collection and publication of the specific type of public information that it focuses on. I don't really need to say this, of course, but all of you are welcome to join the fray also. I feel certain many will not even feel the need for such an invitation. :-) -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 15 16:14:14 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA02520; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 16:04:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gsp.org (rsk.itw.com [208.211.3.21]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id QAA02513 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 16:04:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsk@localhost) by gsp.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA24867; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 19:04:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 19:04:35 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: Scott Southwick Subject: Re: On "Opt-out" [a Postscript] Message-ID: <19990415190435.B24650@gsp.org> References: <3716322F.C786D928@liszt.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: <3716322F.C786D928@liszt.com>; from Scott Southwick on Thu, Apr 15, 1999 at 11:38:41AM -0700 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Sometimes synchronicity is an amazing thing. While I was writing my previous note, and in part commenting on dejanews's activities, they spammed me *again*. ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk@gsp.org From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 15 16:29:13 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA02658; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 16:24:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bolero-x.rahul.net (bolero.rahul.net [192.160.13.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id QAA02651 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 16:24:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from waltz.rahul.net by bolero-x.rahul.net with SMTP id AA09444 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for ); Thu, 15 Apr 1999 16:24:26 -0700 Received: by waltz.rahul.net (5.67b8/jive-a2i-1.0) id AA01002; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 16:24:25 -0700 Message-Id: <199904152324.AA01002@waltz.rahul.net> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: On "Opt-out" In-Reply-To: <3716322F.C786D928@liszt.com> Date: Thu, 15 Apr 99 16:24:24 -0700 From: Michelle Dick Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:38:41 -0700 scotty@liszt.com wrote: > From the day I started Liszt in 1995, Liszt has been an 'opt-out' robot. > We always trumpeted this fact: for the first three years, Liszt's main > About/Help/FAQ page, linked to from every page of Liszt, began with the > words, "Liszt is basically a mailing list spider. It queries servers > from around the globe and compiles the results into one directory..." Ah, so it doesn't actually query *people*, just other robots. I don't personally have a problem with this. > Nor does that surprise me. The right of Internet directories' spiders to >collect and dispense information from servers has been long-established. >From *servers*, not people. And they don't dispense copyrighted content. > more in-your-face than what Liszt does. Liszt just reports the existence > of various mailing lists, and how to subscribe, as reported by various > list servers around the world. Again, by querying automatic *servers*, not people. > Anyways. I do not and cannot speak for Topica, Liszt or anybody but > myself at this point. But I didn't feel like sitting on my hands, > either. The recent complaints about Topica have not been about them sending unsolicited email to automated servers, but rather to people. > Again: if you like Liszt, I think you're going to love Topica. Why, do they also restrict their information gathering to only servers (i.e. web sites, automatic mail software, or posters on public billboards) and not bother individual people with unsolicited requests? -- Michelle Dick artemis@rahul.net East Palo Alto, CA Owner, FATFREE Vegetarian Mailing List From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 15 16:44:29 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA02387; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 15:59:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gsp.org (rsk.itw.com [208.211.3.21]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA02368 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 15:59:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsk@localhost) by gsp.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA24828; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:59:33 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:59:27 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: Scott Southwick Subject: Re: On "Opt-out" Message-ID: <19990415185927.A24650@gsp.org> References: <3716322F.C786D928@liszt.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: <3716322F.C786D928@liszt.com>; from Scott Southwick on Thu, Apr 15, 1999 at 11:38:41AM -0700 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, Apr 15, 1999 at 11:38:41AM -0700, Scott Southwick wrote: > During this whole period, the ethics of Liszt's methods were never > questioned in a public forum, to my knowledge. I suggest that you search the archives of this mailing list (for starters) to find such discussion. Among other things, you might look for a Subject line of "Do www.liszt.com ever give up?" (That's not the only discussion, it's simply a place to start. Liszt.com has been discussed under other subject headings here as well in other places, including Usenet newsgroups.) > Nor does that surprise me. The right of Internet directories' spiders to > collect and dispense information from servers has been long-established. Oh? There's no question that it's done -- frequently. But I hardly think that there exists universal agreement that a "right" to do so exists. In fact, you might recall that some of the activities of spiders have been questioned in detail -- for example, the load imposed on key sites by repeated spider visits has been discussed; for another example, Kahle's web archives have been discussed w.r.t their relationship to the preservation of copyright. > sucks up everything everybody says on any corner of Usenet and keeps it > on the web forever! Now, you better believe people used to question > that, too, even though it's beyond question now I don't think what dejanews does is by any means "beyond question". A great many questions have been asked (and continue to be asked) about their operations--including, by the way, *their* spamming activities--and their responsibility for erroneous (e.g. forged) content. > Again: if you like Liszt, I think you're going to love Topica. If you've > ever been to visit them (and I've spent countless hours with them) you > know that they're a terrific organization, through-and-through. I don't care how nice you think they are; for that matter, I don't care how nice *I* think they are. If they engage in spamming, then they'll be blacklisted, blocked, filtered, and ultimately driven out of business -- as well they should be under those circumstances. ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk@gsp.org From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 15 18:14:13 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA03738; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:13:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA03731 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:13:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA10223 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:14:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA23539 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:25:38 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: recent posts about Topica In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:43:48 -0400. <19990415184348.A24572@gsp.org> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:25:38 -0700 Message-ID: <23537.924225938@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <19990415184348.A24572@gsp.org>, Rich Kulawiec wrote: >On Thu, Apr 15, 1999 at 09:47:32AM -0400, Nick Simicich wrote: >> Here is the point: UBE/Spamming is never acceptable, no matter what the >> greater good served. Floods, fires, starving or missing children, wars, >> disease, death, pestilence, etc., none of these justify UBE. IMPORTANT >> things like this happen every day. And I believe that the net standard is >> that UBE is unacceptable, no matter what the content of the message. > >I couldn't agree more enthusiastically with what Nick has said here. >There are NO excuses for UBE of any kind under any circumstances, >and that includes those where people claim to be performing some >sort of "service to the Internet community". (Ironically, the transparency >of these false claims usually escapes those who are making them.) I dunno if it is always really that clear cut. Many people have urged the IMRSS Project to notify postmasters when their mail servers are listed as open relays in the IMRSS data base. Note that open relays clearly _are_ dangerous, and there has even been a CERT advisory put out on them. One person said ``Well, if my house was on fire, and my neighbor came over to tell me that, I would not think of his visit as an unwarranted intrusion.'' It this directly analogous to someone telling you (and a few zillion other people like you) that your mail server is badly unsecured, and that it may cause you some problems in the future? Beats me. All I can tell you is that IMRSS _has not_ sent out any such notifications (yet). Some company sent me an E-mail awhile back telling me that I had some broken links on my web site, and exactly where those were. It was UBE, but it didn't annoy me, and I'm usually pretty uptight about such things. Ask anybody. -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 17 01:04:19 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id AAA24362; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 00:50:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dns.topica.com ([206.111.131.72]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id AAA24350 for ; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 00:50:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tina.topica.com (ts033d24.sjc-ca.concentric.net [206.173.231.132]) by dns.topica.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA02952 for ; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 00:50:01 -0700 Reply-To: From: "Tina Lin" To: Subject: update on Topica's policies Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 00:49:44 -0700 Message-ID: <000601be88a6$dc41c8c0$84e7adce@topica.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2212 (4.71.2419.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.0810.800 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, I'm from Topica, and I wanted to give you an update on the unsolicited mail issue that has been under discussion here for the past few days. After discussing the points raised here, we have decided to halt our current practices of notifying list owners regarding their listings in the Liszt/Topica directory and archiving options, and to spend more time investigating the issues. As previously mentioned, we did solicit opinions and feedback from many list owners, and we had concluded that it was important to notify list owners of any issues that may affect their lists - even though it meant that some of the contacts might be viewed as "unsolicited." However, based on the discussion here, it is clear that we must re-examine our position on this. The key issues are: 1. As you know, we are now working with Liszt to combine our directories. We believed it was important to notify the list owner that his/her list, part of the Liszt database, is now part of the Liszt/Topica directory - primarily to provide an opportunity for list owners to update/edit or remove the information for their lists. 2. Many Topica users are subscribing to lists through us. We believed it was important to notify the list owner that someone has joined his/her list through Topica, with a one-time opt-in request to allow web-based reading for that subscriber. It is our sincere desire and intent to deliver a valuable service for both list owners and subscribers. While it may not be possible to come up with a solution that pleases everyone, we would like to balance the tradeoffs and make the best possible decision - one that works for the overall list owner community. We invite you to continue to discuss the issues and help us make the best possible decision. Rather than monopolize the discussion on this list, if you are interested, please join the discussion on our List Owner Advisory Board list: mailto:owneradvisors-subscribe@topica.com. And, once again, if you do want us to remove your list from the Liszt/Topica directory, please let me, Ariel or anyone at Topica know, and we will take care of it immediately. Thanks for the discussion. I hope you'll contribute your thoughts on our List Owner Advisory Board list. Tina Lin Co-founder & Vice President, Topica tina@get.topica.com tel 415.344.3812 From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 17 12:20:52 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA03920; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:41:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id LAA03910 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:41:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vesta.na.informix.com (ifmxlenx.na.informix.com [192.147.111.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA27748 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 09:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dg-crenaud (compserv73.na.informix.com [134.168.240.73]) by vesta.na.informix.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA24238 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:17:44 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199904151617.LAA24238@vesta.na.informix.com> From: "Chuck Renaud" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:13:50 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: recent posts about Topica Reply-to: cjrenaud@sinnfree.org In-reply-to: <3.0.5.32.19990415094732.03ac04a0@127.0.0.1> References: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Where you got the original listings from is totally irrelevant. Is it? I wonder if the "owners" of the original listings gave their permission to have their content consolidated by Topica. I've given permission to have my mailing lists included in their directories (not Topica), but nowhere was it said or implied that the information would/could be distributed beyond their radius. From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 17 12:35:36 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA03768; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:38:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id LAA03753 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:38:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CU.NIH.GOV (silkt.nih.gov [128.231.160.112]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id PAA13264 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 15:01:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199904142201.PAA13264@honor.greatcircle.com> To: ariel@get.topica.com cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: "Roger Fajman" Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 17:57:02 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: recent posts about Topica Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Our decision was to send one email to the owner of each list giving them the > ability, on an ongoing basis, to modify or remove their list's information > from our directory. Unfortunately, it is not always possible to determine > when a single person is the owner of multiple lists, so some owners of > multiple lists received multiple messages. Your company does not appear to be paying attention to the responses that it gets to the messages. I responded to the message I received asking that the list (HHSDIR-L@LIST.NIH.GOV) be removed. It's not an appropriate list for your service and the description is completely wrong. So far I have received no reply to my message and the list still appears on Topica. It has been a week to two since I sent in my request. Roger Fajman Division of Network Systems & Telecommunications, CIT National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA Internet: raf@cu.nih.gov Telephone: +1 301 402 4265 Postmaster: CU.NIH.GOV, LIST.NIH.GOV, MAILFWD.NIH.GOV, PACKET.NET.NIH.GOV From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 17 12:51:13 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA03964; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:42:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id LAA03954 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:42:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from iceberg.ultimanet.com (ns.ultimanet.com [205.179.129.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id LAA29236 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:26:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 5220brycer (06-077.006.popsite.net [209.209.8.77]) by iceberg.ultimanet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA08087 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 13:08:46 -0700 Message-ID: <008501be876c$e65e25a0$1608d1d1@5220brycer.ultimanet.com> From: "Bryce Ryan" To: Subject: Errors-To: question Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:22:17 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk i run a few lists at various small ISPs...nothing major, but with enough traffic and subscribers to keep me busy in all the usual ways :-) i'm working with a new provider for a list that will generate a lot of traffic; typical contentious discussion list. the provider insists that they must insert Errors-To: headers that point at the list admin e-dress; they're muttering something about bounce handling and not wanting to have to deal with bounces from *my* list. i thought the general wisdom was that Errors-To: was useless, in fact down right harmful, though i can't seem to recall the specifics. can anyone help me out? i'm trying to understand the issues myself, at least well enough to have an intelligent discussion with the provider's postmaster. thanks. -- +++++ Bryce Ryan +++++++++++++ brycer@ultima.org +++++ From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 17 13:05:34 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA03857; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:40:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id LAA03846 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:40:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from epithumia.math.uh.edu (epithumia.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id UAA16814 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 20:23:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from tibbs@localhost) by epithumia.math.uh.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id WAA17529; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 22:22:32 -0500 To: "Roger Fajman" From: tibbs@hpc.uh.edu Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: recent posts about Topica References: <199904142307.QAA13922@honor.greatcircle.com> Date: 14 Apr 1999 22:22:32 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Roger Fajman"'s message of "Wed, 14 Apr 1999 19:01:25 -0400 (EDT)" Message-ID: Lines: 20 User-Agent: Gnus/5.070065 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.65) Emacs/20.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>>>> "RF" == Roger Fajman writes: RF> And it's still a fact that there was no reply to my request to remove RF> the list. That would seem to be the courteous thing to do. I got a reply. Of course, it was just a demonstration of how the respondent was "unclear on the concept". I said, "please remove all lists at my site." The response was "you can visit this nice URL and do it yourself." Sheesh. They seem perfectly able to _add_ me to their "service" instead of pointing out that I could go to some nice URL and do it myself, which I could at least have ignored. For some reason they don't understand how to do the reverse. The argument that "we just took our listings from other listings" is bogus; my OK to include my lists in some listing is not transitive. I have no problem with the PAML because I have confidence in the people that maintain it. I have no confidence in Topica. (Well, I had no confidence; now I have active distrust.) - J< From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 17 13:20:36 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA04037; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:43:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id LAA04027 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:43:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ifolk.iserver.net (ifolk.iserver.net [192.41.44.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id IAA14515 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 1999 08:32:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from patroon ([160.43.47.9]) by ifolk.iserver.net (8.8.5) id JAA24643; Fri, 16 Apr 1999 09:32:25 -0600 (MDT) From: "Tom Neff" To: Subject: Topica and Liszt - the straight dope Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 11:33:08 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2212 (4.71.2419.0) In-Reply-To: <199904160800.BAA07523@honor.greatcircle.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.0810.800 Importance: Normal Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk There are really three completely separate issues here, although our friends at Topica and Liszt seem to treat them interchangeably. ISSUE #1 - PUBLIC LIST DIRECTORIES ================================== Topica and Liszt claim (and most list admins would agree) that they're entitled to compile directories of publicly accessible mailing lists, without being considered rude or evil. If in the course of doing this they "harvest" previous directories published others, thereby falling afoul of someone's compilation copyright and getting the lawyers interested, that's their problem, but it's no skin off the nose of your average list manager. ISSUE #2 - SPAMMING LISTOWNERS ============================== They also seem to think they have the right to conduct unsolicited bulk emailings to the registered owners of the lists they find, alerting them to the joys of yet-another list service, inviting them to opt in or out of yet-another directory, and so forth. They are DEAD WRONG about this, and their persistence in doing it anyway (with or without self-serving essays here) makes them SPAMMERS. Note that it does not matter whether the CONTENT of the spam refers to the non-evil directory from Issue #1; it would still be spam if it were about a bake sale for the children's choir. Therefore it will not wash for Topica and Liszt to respond to "you are spamming, it is wrong, stop it!" messages by saying "What's so bad about a directory of lists?..." Nope-nope-nope. If they persist in spamming, they will be listed with the abuse organizations and find themselves subject to anti-spam measures, which can take months to clear away even after complete reform. That's not a threat, just a statement of the way the Net works and a heads-up while they still have the chance. ISSUE #3 - UNSOLICITED ARCHIVING ================================ This is another area where they could really get their you-know-what caught in the wringer, but they seem to know it already. I would encourage listowners to assert a COMPILATION COPYRIGHT on the contents of their lists, both in the materials sent to new members and in the INFO and FAQ files, and in a once-per-month administrivia reminder. List hosting services do not have the right to archive your list without your permission, but some of them seem to be doing it anyway, either by permitting individual list MEMBERS to authorize archiving (a permission that is not theirs to give) or by creating bogus "members" who join lists using mail aliases that feed the archiver. These bogus aliases are driven by scripts that know how to respond to a Confirm message. (I would also encourage changing your confirmation scheme if you have that much access to your list software.) I am not "against" Liszt or Topica or Egroups or the other free market list resources - I think they're an important component of the future of email forums. Precisely BECAUSE they are important, it's vital that they do it right, and not poison the well by misbehaving and giving their business a bad name. From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 17 17:38:35 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA07286; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 17:19:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Kitten.mcs.com (Kitten.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA07279 for ; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 17:19:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Jupiter.mcs.net (dattier@Jupiter.mcs.net [192.160.127.88]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.7/8.8.2) with ESMTP id TAA13128; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 19:19:43 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by Jupiter.mcs.net (8.8.7/8.8.2) id TAA08649; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 19:19:43 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <199904180019.TAA08649@Jupiter.mcs.net> Subject: Re: Errors-To: question To: brycer@ultima.org (Bryce Ryan) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 19:19:42 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <008501be876c$e65e25a0$1608d1d1@5220brycer.ultimanet.com> from "Bryce Ryan" at Apr 15, 99 11:22:17 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Bryce Ryan asked, | i'm working with a new provider for a list that will generate a lot of | traffic; typical contentious discussion list. the provider insists that | they must insert Errors-To: headers that point at the list admin | e-dress; they're muttering something about bounce handling and | not wanting to have to deal with bounces from *my* list. | | i thought the general wisdom was that Errors-To: was useless, in | fact down right harmful, though i can't seem to recall the specifics. Errors-To: is deprecated as a way of directing NDNs (they should be sent to the envelope sender of the undelivered item). Almost all MTAs will ignore it. But I can't see that it should cause any harm as long as you don't rely on it and also use your administrator address as the envelope sender. If your provider also insists on some wrong choice for the envelope sender (such as the list submission address or the posting member's address) and expect Errors-To: to get NDNs to come to the right place, then you have a problem. If they let you point both the envelope sender and Errors-To: to your administrator address, then let the baby have its bottle. From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 17 18:24:10 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA07536; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 17:50:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id RAA07529 for ; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 17:49:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 625 invoked by uid 100); 17 Apr 1999 20:49:43 -0400 Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 20:49:43 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Bryce Ryan cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Errors-To: question In-Reply-To: <008501be876c$e65e25a0$1608d1d1@5220brycer.ultimanet.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > i thought the general wisdom was that Errors-To: was useless, in > fact down right harmful, though i can't seem to recall the specifics. It's a sendmail-ism that sometimes works, sort of. The right thing to do, of course, is to ensure that the envelope MAIL FROM address points to some place that can deal with the bounces. Traditionally it's a human who tries to read the bounce messages, these days it's often a robot. Particularly if your mail program uses per-receipient envelopes, robot bounce handling can be very effective. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 17 18:40:05 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA07812; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 18:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vjs.telephonet.com (vjs.telephonet.com [207.252.88.49]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA07805 for ; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 18:21:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [207.252.88.49] (207.252.88.49) by vjs.telephonet.com with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 2.2); Sat, 17 Apr 1999 21:23:16 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <199904160800.BAA07523@honor.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 4.0 for Cray T3E-1200 Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 21:16:27 -0400 To: "Tom Neff" , From: Vince Sabio Subject: Re: Topica and Liszt - the straight dope Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ** Sometime around 11:33 -0400 04/16/1999, Tom Neff sent everyone: >There are really three completely separate issues here, although our friends >at Topica and Liszt seem to treat them interchangeably. Actually, no -- they are treating them separately, but the lines tend to be confused by some of the list-managers members. As I've stated before, I am not a Topica employee and I cannot speak for Topica (which raises the question of why I'm posting -- hopefully, it is to clear the waters rather than muddy them, but that remains to be seen...) >ISSUE #1 - PUBLIC LIST DIRECTORIES >================================== >Topica and Liszt claim (and most list admins would agree) that they're >entitled to compile directories of publicly accessible mailing lists, >without being considered rude or evil. If in the course of doing this they >"harvest" previous directories published others, thereby falling afoul of >someone's compilation copyright and getting the lawyers interested, that's >their problem, but it's no skin off the nose of your average list manager. Since Topica's list directory was compiled with full cooperation from the nice folks at Liszt, PAML, and Tile.net, I don't think that any lawyers will be particularly interested. >ISSUE #2 - SPAMMING LISTOWNERS >============================== >They also seem to think they have the right to conduct unsolicited bulk >emailings No, but I realize that your message was posted prior to Tina Lin's message on the UBE issue. (I received them grossly out of order, but I seem to receive most or all of the mail on this list grossly out of order.) Anyway, I can assure you that the discussion here on list-managers is being taken very seriously by Topica, and has spawned a good deal of internal discussion over there -- which I see as A Good Thing. Please see Tina's message, and join the discussion group that she has set up for this; it is an opportunity to provide your POV directly into Topica management on this subject, and hopefully work out a course of action that will make everyone happy. (Well, okay, you can't make *everyone* happy, but you can try to make the majority happy, and give $5 gift certificates to everyone else.) (For anyone who isn't *really* clueless, but just plays a clueless person on the Internet: That last comment was just a joke. Please don't try to collect your $5 gift certificate from Topica if you're not happy with the solution. But also don't complain if you didn't bother participating in the discussion group that Tina has set up.) >to the registered owners of the lists they find, alerting them to >the joys of yet-another list service, inviting them to opt in or out of >yet-another directory, and so forth. They are DEAD WRONG about this, and >their persistence in doing it anyway (with or without self-serving essays >here) makes them SPAMMERS. Note that it does not matter whether the CONTENT >of the spam refers to the non-evil directory from Issue #1; it would still >be spam if it were about a bake sale for the children's choir. Therefore it >will not wash for Topica and Liszt to respond to "you are spamming, it is >wrong, stop it!" messages by saying "What's so bad about a directory of >lists?..." But that is not what they were saying, unless we were reading very different messages. But previous statements (and my own personal views on all of this) aside, Topica really *is* hearing you. Yes, you can say that it has taken a while to be heard, but it is happening, and if you want to help harbor the anti-UBE position, then you should join the discussion and present it. And the first person who says, "Why should I have to take the time to explain to them ..." gets smacked. ;-) >Nope-nope-nope. If they persist in spamming, they will be >listed with the abuse organizations and find themselves subject to anti-spam >measures, which can take months to clear away even after complete reform. >That's not a threat, just a statement of the way the Net works and a >heads-up while they still have the chance. They are listening -- and a window of opportunity has opened wherein we can provide feedback directly to Topica, and try to work out a solution that is acceptable to [there goes that word again] everyone. >ISSUE #3 - UNSOLICITED ARCHIVING >================================ No need to respond on this one, since Topica is not doing unsolicited archiving. >I am not "against" Liszt or Topica or Egroups or the other free market list >resources - I think they're an important component of the future of email >forums. Precisely BECAUSE they are important, it's vital that they do it >right, and not poison the well by misbehaving and giving their business a >bad name. Agreed. __________________________________________________________________________ Vince Sabio Boy & His Sabre: vince@humournet.com Stop Internet Spam! From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 17 22:39:10 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA09880; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 22:25:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail9.svr.pol.co.uk (mail9.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.22]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id WAA09854 for ; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 22:24:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from modem-31.visine.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.136.94.31] ident=cc047) by mail9.svr.pol.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 10Yk4S-0005wg-00; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 06:24:44 +0100 Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 06:24:39 +0100 (BST) From: Jeffrey Goldberg X-Sender: cc047@arpad.thegreen.private Reply-To: Jeffrey Goldberg To: Bryce Ryan cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Errors-To: question In-Reply-To: <008501be876c$e65e25a0$1608d1d1@5220brycer.ultimanet.com> Message-ID: Organization: Cranfield University Computer Centre MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, 15 Apr 1999, Bryce Ryan wrote: > i'm working with a new provider for a list that will generate a lot of > traffic; typical contentious discussion list. the provider insists that > they must insert Errors-To: headers that point at the list admin > e-dress; they're muttering something about bounce handling and > not wanting to have to deal with bounces from *my* list. > i thought the general wisdom was that Errors-To: was useless, in > fact down right harmful, though i can't seem to recall the specifics. I don't know about harmful, but it certainly is useless. The correct way is the set the SMTP (or envelope) From to the address that should get the errors. Note this is not the same thing as the Header From. The mail standards, clearly state that error reports should go to the envelope From. With sendmail (and all sendmail drop-ins) the envelope from can be set on the originating commandline with the -f option as long as the username that is calling sendmail is among the "trusted users". Conventionally, mailing lists set the envelope from to owner-LISTNAME@site.dom so if that is an alias for you (the list manager) then all is well and your ISP should be happy. -j -- Jeffrey Goldberg +44 (0)1234 750 111 x 2826 Cranfield Computer Centre FAX 751 814 J.Goldberg@Cranfield.ac.uk http://WWW.Cranfield.ac.uk/public/cc/cc047/ Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice. From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 18 11:56:44 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA19963; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 11:36:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id LAA19956 for ; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 11:36:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197] (may be forged)) by plaidworks.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA06494 ; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 11:40:54 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 11:22:32 -0700 To: Jeffrey Goldberg , Bryce Ryan From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: Errors-To: question Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 6:24 AM +0100 4/18/99, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote: >> i thought the general wisdom was that Errors-To: was useless, in >> fact down right harmful, though i can't seem to recall the specifics. > > I don't know about harmful, but it certainly is useless. Modern sendmails (since sendmail 8?) are programmed to ignore errors-to, unless it's specifically turned on. If you look in the sendmail README, it specifically says that Errors-To violates RFC1123, which is at . The specific paragraphs are 5.3.7(e) and 5.3.7(f). If you use "errors-to", all you'll do is get mail routed back from those sites that are out of spec with the RFCs. Since the vast majority of the internet rides on the back of sendmail, depending on errors-to will fail for all by the minority of sites that haven't figured out how to run a mail server compliant with standards that are a decade old. (I know, this is the internet. We can't expect people to adopt standards that quickly...) Now, having said that -- I've seriously considered adding an Errors-To line to my mail lists, specifically to deal with those sites that *do* return mail in non-conforming ways. They're a small minority of sites, but in my experience, they seem to be the ones most likely to start mail loops, return mail as the original poster, send mail to root, postmaster, or any damn address EXCEPT the one we specified in the envelope, and generally make our lives crazy as admins. Adding the errors-to may be a way to get some of this rogue bounce mail to behave. I may try that in one of my next mailings, point it to some specific, unique address, and see what happens. But the bottom line -- errors-to won't do what was being asked of it here. It might have six or seven years ago, but most mail is now handled by mailers that use the envelope and not Errors-to. the simple fact that sendmail doesn't do it is enough -- it's the 800 pound gorilla of SMTP, so either you build your system to cooperate with sendmail, or you'll find it won't work... -- Chuq Von Rospach (Hockey fan? ) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) + Featuring Winslow Leach at the Piano! From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 18 17:27:27 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA23428; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 17:06:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gsp.org (rsk.itw.com [208.211.3.21]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA23421 for ; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 17:06:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsk@localhost) by gsp.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA25070; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 20:07:32 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 20:07:30 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: Tom Neff Subject: Re: Topica and Liszt - the straight dope Message-ID: <19990418200730.A25001@gsp.org> References: <199904160800.BAA07523@honor.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: ; from Tom Neff on Fri, Apr 16, 1999 at 11:33:08AM -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Fri, Apr 16, 1999 at 11:33:08AM -0400, Tom Neff wrote: > ISSUE #1 - PUBLIC LIST DIRECTORIES > ================================== > Topica and Liszt claim (and most list admins would agree) that they're > entitled to compile directories of publicly accessible mailing lists, > without being considered rude or evil. If in the course of doing this they > "harvest" previous directories published others, thereby falling afoul of > someone's compilation copyright and getting the lawyers interested, that's > their problem, but it's no skin off the nose of your average list manager. Correct. Topica/liszt/whoever also must realize that if *they* want to make this the cornerstone of their business, it is they who bear the burden of figuring out how to do it without spamming listowners, without violating copyrights, without providing unwanted "features" that some of us consider bugs (e.g. web-based subscription forms) and so on. Is that tough? Yeah, it is. But it's hardly our responsibility as listowners to teach these people how to run their business. We owe them *nothing*, and they owe us *everything*, because its our hard work that they're trying to make a profit on. > ISSUE #2 - SPAMMING LISTOWNERS > ============================== > They also seem to think they have the right to conduct unsolicited bulk > emailings to the registered owners of the lists they find, alerting them to > the joys of yet-another list service, inviting them to opt in or out of > yet-another directory, and so forth. They are DEAD WRONG about this [...] I completely agree. I've already submitted them to several blacklists because of their spamming activities. > ISSUE #3 - UNSOLICITED ARCHIVING > ================================ > This is another area where they could really get their you-know-what caught > in the wringer, but they seem to know it already. I would encourage > listowners to assert a COMPILATION COPYRIGHT on the contents of their lists, > both in the materials sent to new members and in the INFO and FAQ files, and > in a once-per-month administrivia reminder. Once again, I completely agree. All of the lists that I run have the compilation copyright explicitly assigned to me, and I fully expect that to be respected. As far as I can tell, Topica is just a bunch of greedy johnny-come-latelies trying to make money off work they didn't do, and now whining because their motives and their methods have both been called into question (or exposed for what they are, e.g. spamming). ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk@gsp.org From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 18 17:41:30 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA23549; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 17:19:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gsp.org (rsk.itw.com [208.211.3.21]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA23542 for ; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 17:19:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsk@localhost) by gsp.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA25105; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 20:20:37 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 20:20:36 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: Vince Sabio Subject: Re: Topica and Liszt - the straight dope Message-ID: <19990418202035.B25001@gsp.org> References: <199904160800.BAA07523@honor.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: ; from Vince Sabio on Sat, Apr 17, 1999 at 09:16:27PM -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Sat, Apr 17, 1999 at 09:16:27PM -0400, Vince Sabio wrote: > Since Topica's list directory was compiled with full cooperation from the > nice folks at Liszt, PAML, and Tile.net, I don't think that any lawyers > will be particularly interested. That depends on how the entries got into *those* lists, doesn't it? > seem to receive most or all of the mail on this list grossly out of > order.) Anyway, I can assure you that the discussion here on > list-managers is being taken very seriously by Topica, and has spawned a > good deal of internal discussion over there -- which I see as A Good Thing. Nice double-speak. Will Topica continue spamming or not? Please answer "yes" or "no" only. > see Tina's message, and join the discussion group that she has set > up for this; it is an opportunity to provide your POV directly into > Topica management on this subject, and hopefully work out a course of > action that will make everyone happy. Oh, I see: "We didn't figure this all out ahead of time. We are clueless newbies and we want you, the experienced listowners, to tell us how we can make money off your work because we're too lazy/stupid/cheap to do our own research. Of course, we still may not take your advice and we're not going to pay you for this." Uh-uh. I don't think so. It's *your* bright idea, *you* go figure out how to make it work without pissing people off and/or ending up in court. > But also don't complain if you didn't bother participating in > the discussion group that Tina has set up.) Ah, I see. "We're really serious about not doing our own research. In fact, we're going to duck the worst of the heat that we richly deserve by setting up our *own* list where we can censor the content to our hearts' content, and then when someone points out the next clueless thing that we do, we'll whine that it never came up on *our* list." > They are listening -- and a window of opportunity has opened wherein we > can provide feedback directly to Topica, and try to work out a solution > that is acceptable to [there goes that word again] everyone. You have FAILED to answer the question -- again. Will Topica continue spamming or not? Because if you think for one minute that you will be allowed to survive as a business while spamming, you're wrong. I don't particularly have anything for or against the general notion of one-stop shopping for mailing lists. But what y'all have done to date is rude, intrusive, offensive, illegal (in states where spam is now illegal) and clueless. If you're serious about doing this right, then you need to get your act together and figure out how (if) your business model can be made to work without the sort of nonsense that you've trotted out so far. Heck, I went from not knowing y'all existed to active dislike in 24 hours and that's not because I had nothing better to do. ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk@gsp.org From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 18 21:37:51 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA26083; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 21:28:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from venus.communitech.net (venus.communitech.net [216.89.176.51]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id VAA26075 for ; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 21:28:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thorby ([204.210.106.57]) by venus.communitech.net ; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 23:23:35 -600 Message-Id: <4.1.19990418181956.0110e9d0@mail.rudbek.com> X-Sender: vawjr@mail.rudbek.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 18:27:10 -1000 To: Rich Kulawiec , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: "Victor A. Wagner, Jr." Subject: Re: Topica and Liszt - the straight dope Cc: Tom Neff In-Reply-To: <19990418200730.A25001@gsp.org> References: <199904160800.BAA07523@honor.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At Sunday 4/18/99 20:07, Rich Kulawiec wrote: >On Fri, Apr 16, 1999 at 11:33:08AM -0400, Tom Neff wrote: >> ISSUE #1 - PUBLIC LIST DIRECTORIES >> ================================== >> Topica and Liszt claim (and most list admins would agree) that they're >> entitled to compile directories of publicly accessible mailing lists, >> without being considered rude or evil. If in the course of doing this they >> "harvest" previous directories published others, thereby falling afoul of >> someone's compilation copyright and getting the lawyers interested, that's >> their problem, but it's no skin off the nose of your average list manager. > >Correct. Topica/liszt/whoever also must realize that if *they* want >to make this the cornerstone of their business, it is they who bear >the burden of figuring out how to do it without spamming listowners, >without violating copyrights, without providing unwanted "features" >that some of us consider bugs (e.g. web-based subscription forms) >and so on. Ok, you've JUST set up an impossible situation. They can't contact the copyright holder (spa violation), and they can't use anything without asking (copyright violation). The way I figure it is.... if you claim copyright on something, you allow UNSOLICITED contact to negotiate for use. Victor A. Wagner, Jr. PGP RSA fingerprint = 4D20 EBF6 0101 B069 3817 8DBF C846 E47A PGP D-H fingerprint = 98BC 65E3 1A19 43EC 3908 65B9 F755 E6F4 63BB 9D93 The five most dangerous words in the English language: "There oughta be a law" From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 18 21:53:03 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA26001; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 21:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.235.116.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id VAA25994 for ; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 21:19:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tpad.squawk.com (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA08400; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 00:19:28 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990419000046.03492ec0@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 00:00:46 -0400 To: Vince Sabio From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: Topica and Liszt - the straight dope Cc: "Tom Neff" , In-Reply-To: References: <199904160800.BAA07523@honor.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 09:16 PM 4/17/99 -0400, Vince Sabio wrote: >>Therefore it >>will not wash for Topica and Liszt to respond to "you are spamming, it is >>wrong, stop it!" messages by saying "What's so bad about a directory of >>lists?..." > >But that is not what they were saying, unless we were reading very different >messages. But previous statements (and my own personal views on all of this) >aside, Topica really *is* hearing you. Yes, you can say that it has taken a >while to be heard, but it is happening, and if you want to help harbor the >anti-UBE position, then you should join the discussion and present it. Remember that we have had two go rounds on this my now. My recollection of the statements by people associated with Topica were (1) pretty much the feint-and-shift change of subject that Tom was describing, and (2) denials from authority that what Topica was doing was spam ("I'm a founding member of CAUCE and I know what spam is and what Topica was doing is not spam" is an abridgement of one posting), and wallowing between those two positions in a very obfuscating way. When this iteration started, someone form Topica asked me why I took positions against theirs, and I tried to explain, off line. I was still irritated over the delay, and I was irritated over the obfuscatory tone of the first interaction. I'm glad that this one has gotten down to more focus than the last one, and I'm glad that progress is being made, and that people at Topica are thinking about this seriously. Maybe we should submit this as a "true tail of spam" to CAUCE, once it is resolved. -- You might be a redneck if -- Your BBQ has its own license plate. Nick Simicich mailto:njs@scifi.squawk.com or (last choice) mailto:njs@us.ibm.com http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html -- Stop by and Light Up The World! From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 18 22:46:56 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA26722; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 22:33:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dns.cyberlink.ch (dns.cyberlink.ch [193.246.253.10]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id WAA26715 for ; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 22:33:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from quill.thinkcoach.com (vpop-99.cyberlink.ch [212.55.211.99]) by dns.cyberlink.ch (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA05960 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 07:33:27 +0200 Received: (from norbert@localhost) by quill.thinkcoach.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA01223; Fri, 16 Apr 1999 13:41:54 +0200 Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 13:41:54 +0200 Message-Id: <199904161141.NAA01223@quill.thinkcoach.com> From: Norbert Bollow Prefer-Language: de, en, fr To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-reply-to: <23537.924225938@monkeys.com> (rfg@monkeys.com) Subject: Re: recent posts about Topica References: <23537.924225938@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Ronald F. Guilmette writes: > Many people have urged the IMRSS Project to notify postmasters when their > mail servers are listed as open relays in the IMRSS data base. If the IMRSS people set up a robot to send out such notifications, then that would indeed be UBE. But when a human at IMRSS tries to contact whoever is in charge of any given open mail relay, that is not _bulk_ email. > One person said ``Well, if my house was on fire, and my neighbor came over > to tell me that, I would not think of his visit as an unwarranted > intrusion.'' That's an example of a personal message, not a _bulk_ message. May blessings from the eternal God surprise and overtake you! Norbert. -- Norbert Bollow, Zuerich, Switzerland. Backup e-mail address: NB@POBOX.COM I'm a coach who assists people in developing their personal networks and reaching their life goals. Please visit my homepage: http://thinkcoach.com From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 19 00:46:54 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id AAA28119; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 00:33:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dns.cyberlink.ch (dns.cyberlink.ch [193.246.253.10]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id AAA28112 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 00:33:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from quill.thinkcoach.com (vpop-99.cyberlink.ch [212.55.211.99]) by dns.cyberlink.ch (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA15586 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 09:33:44 +0200 Received: (from norbert@localhost) by quill.thinkcoach.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA04778; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 08:33:50 +0200 Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 08:33:50 +0200 Message-Id: <199904190633.IAA04778@quill.thinkcoach.com> From: Norbert Bollow Prefer-Language: de, en, fr To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-reply-to: <4.1.19990418181956.0110e9d0@mail.rudbek.com> (vawjr@rudbek.com) Subject: Re: Topica and Liszt - the straight dope References: <199904160800.BAA07523@honor.greatcircle.com> <4.1.19990418181956.0110e9d0@mail.rudbek.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > >Correct. Topica/liszt/whoever also must realize that if *they* want > >to make this the cornerstone of their business, it is they who bear > >the burden of figuring out how to do it without spamming listowners, > >without violating copyrights, without providing unwanted "features" > >that some of us consider bugs (e.g. web-based subscription forms) > >and so on. > > Ok, you've JUST set up an impossible situation. They can't contact the > copyright holder (spa violation), and they can't use anything without > asking (copyright violation). There is no such thing as an impossible situation. Be creative! > The way I figure it is.... if you claim copyright on something, you allow > UNSOLICITED contact to negotiate for use. This is true. Sending me an unsolicited, _personal_ message is certainly not spamming. It's a personal message if the person who sends it either knows me in some manner, or the sender has personally looked at my content and was impressed by it, or the sender has looked at my website and read what I say about copyright there. But if my work is of so little value to a company that they don't bother to pay a live human being for looking at my content and sending me a personal message, then I don't want any unsolicited mail from them. Whenever they're setting up an email robot to send unsolicited email, they're spamming in the sense of sending UBE, and they deserve to be put out of business. May blessings from the eternal God surprise and overtake you! Norbert. -- Norbert Bollow, Zuerich, Switzerland. Backup e-mail address: NB@POBOX.COM I'm a coach who assists people in developing their personal networks and reaching their life goals. Please visit my homepage: http://thinkcoach.com From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 19 01:47:56 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id BAA28529; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 01:01:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id BAA28516 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 01:01:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA24403 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 01:03:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA24384 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 01:14:43 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: recent posts about Topica In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 16 Apr 1999 13:41:54 +0200. <199904161141.NAA01223@quill.thinkcoach.com> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 01:14:42 -0700 Message-ID: <24382.924509682@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <199904161141.NAA01223@quill.thinkcoach.com>, Norbert Bollow wrote: >Ronald F. Guilmette writes: > >> Many people have urged the IMRSS Project to notify postmasters when their >> mail servers are listed as open relays in the IMRSS data base. > >If the IMRSS people set up a robot to send out such notifications, then >that would indeed be UBE. But when a human at IMRSS tries to contact >whoever is in charge of any given open mail relay, that is not _bulk_ >email. I can assure you that the question was raised only in the context of some *automated process* sending out the notifications. The IMRSS Project has already cataloged over 100,000 open relays. We most definitely DO NOT have anybody who is interested in volunteering to send out 100,000 personally composed messages. Fortunately, we may have found another solution to the problem, and one that will not involve spamming. -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 19 04:33:26 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id EAA03466; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 04:16:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gsp.org (rsk.itw.com [208.211.3.21]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id EAA03459 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 04:16:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsk@localhost) by gsp.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA28852 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 06:53:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 06:53:05 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Topica and Liszt - the straight dope Message-ID: <19990419065305.A28847@gsp.org> References: <199904160800.BAA07523@honor.greatcircle.com> <19990418200730.A25001@gsp.org> <4.1.19990418181956.0110e9d0@mail.rudbek.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: <4.1.19990418181956.0110e9d0@mail.rudbek.com>; from Victor A. Wagner, Jr. on Sun, Apr 18, 1999 at 06:27:10PM -1000 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Sun, Apr 18, 1999 at 06:27:10PM -1000, Victor A. Wagner, Jr. wrote: > Ok, you've JUST set up an impossible situation. They can't contact the > copyright holder (spa violation), and they can't use anything without > asking (copyright violation). I've done no such thing. See below. > The way I figure it is.... if you claim copyright on something, you allow > UNSOLICITED contact to negotiate for use. Excuse me, but: 1. Asserting a copyright hardly constitutes granting permission to be spammed, and 2. I'm in the phone book. I also read and answer non-UBE mail. Topica and/or others who wish to use my copyrighted material are free to avoid spamming me by contacting me personally (i.e. via non-UBE) or by phone or postal mail. That hardly makes it "impossible" for them to contact me. It's true that it does make it more expensive and/or more of a pain than spamming, but if they can only manage to do business by resorting to spamming, then they shouldn't *be* in business. ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk@gsp.org From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 19 08:15:59 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA05933; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 07:52:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dns.topica.com ([206.111.131.72]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id HAA05925 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 07:52:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tina.topica.com (ts014d44.sjc-ca.concentric.net [206.173.236.200]) by dns.topica.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA08506 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 07:52:21 -0700 Reply-To: From: "Tina Lin" To: Subject: RE: Topica and Liszt - the straight dope Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 07:52:12 -0700 Message-ID: <000901be8a74$354f9540$c8ecadce@topica.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2212 (4.71.2419.0) In-Reply-To: <19990418202035.B25001@gsp.org> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.0810.800 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > -----Original Message----- > From: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM > [mailto:list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM]On Behalf Of Rich Kulawiec > Sent: Sunday, April 18, 1999 5:21 PM > Nice double-speak. Will Topica continue spamming or not? We have stopped notifying list owners. We *had* discussed this issue with a group of experienced list owners prior to starting the notifications, and based on their input, we had concluded that it was the best decision. However, based on the discussion here, it is obvious that we need input from a broader group of list owners. We would really welcome your input, not just on this issue, but on other ongoing issues. We have set up a public, unmoderated discussion list for list owners interested in providing feedback. Hope to see some of you there. Again, if you have any issues or questions, or if you would like us to remove your list, please let me or anyone at Topica know, and we will take care of it immediately. Tina Lin Co-founder & Vice President, Topica tina@get.topica.com tel 415.344.3812 From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 19 11:32:07 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA08776; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 11:25:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id LAA08766 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 11:25:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net (gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.120.85]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA23877 for ; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 17:56:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from f8c3b (1Cust31.tnt28.nyc3.da.uu.net [208.255.109.31]) by gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA12468; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 17:56:52 -0700 (PDT) From: "David W. Vaughan" To: Cc: "Tom Neff" Subject: Compilation copyright-some wording examples pls? Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 20:56:48 -0400 Message-ID: <001301be89ff$80f72960$c77a2599@f8c3b> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <199904180800.BAA11385@honor.greatcircle.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi Tom! Tom Neff wrote on Friday 16 Apr 99: > I would encourage > listowners to assert a COMPILATION COPYRIGHT on the contents of their lists, > both in the materials sent to new members and in the INFO and FAQ files, and > in a once-per-month administrivia reminder. Would you and/or others here be able to point me to some examples of the wording that you are using in your lists, so I can learn from them? TIA! /dwv From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 19 11:50:12 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA08761; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 11:25:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id LAA08750 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 11:25:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ifolk.iserver.net (ifolk.iserver.net [192.41.44.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id KAA19142 for ; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 10:08:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from librarynt ([160.43.47.9]) by ifolk.iserver.net (8.8.5) id LAA27257; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 11:08:32 -0600 (MDT) From: "Tom Neff" To: Subject: Re: Topica's behavior. Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 13:08:44 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2212 (4.71.2419.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <199904180800.BAA11385@honor.greatcircle.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Tina Lin wrote: > After discussing the points raised here, we have decided to halt our current > practices of notifying list owners regarding their listings in the > Liszt/Topica directory and archiving options, and to spend more time > investigating the issues. What you should have done, and should do now, is make sure that public forums and mail list management FAQs include a mention of your service - and then stop bugging people. You are not the only service, and you will not be the only one in future. We come here to learn about stuff like Topica. > 1. As you know, we are now working with Liszt to combine our directories. > We believed it was important to notify the list owner that his/her list, > part of the Liszt database, is now part of the Liszt/Topica directory - > primarily to provide an opportunity for list owners to update/edit or remove > the information for their lists. If listowners actively sought participation with Liszt, i.e. there was a contract on their part, then of course it makes sense to notify them of the merge. If on the other hand Liszt was just harvesting the PAML or otherwise scouring the Net for listservs to catalog, then you have no more right to annoy unsuspecting owners with this news than you would if you repainted your dumpster. > 2. Many Topica users are subscribing to lists through us. That is your business. When they reach us they are not "Topica users" but (presumably) bona fide applicants who wish to join our lists like anyone else. We did not ask to be "portaled" through services like Topica, and we are under no obligation to support or give special consideration to companies who decide to try and make a dime doing it anyway. > We believed it > was important to notify the list owner that someone has joined his/her list > through Topica, with a one-time opt-in request to allow web-based reading > for that subscriber. You believed it was important for YOU, because you built your business model that way. As listowners we ALREADY receive sufficient notice when a new member joins, without your help. The only thing you are adding is spam. > It is our sincere desire and intent to deliver a valuable service for both > list owners and subscribers. You are not, imho, in a position to offer much of value to EXISTING listowners who intend to continue hosting their lists on traditional servers. Mail list surfing tends to yield junk subscribers - quality names come from richly related Web content. In English that means that GUITAR-STRINGS-L is much better off getting its members from guitar and music store websites than from some "directory" where people, or other spammers, gang-join everything starting with "G". In fact, given the potential for abuse, I will filter out requests from directory services soon, sending them to an autoreply that explains the right way to join. Note that ad-supported _hosting_ of new, private and ad-hoc lists is a very useful service, with about a dozen competitors, and I wish you luck. But lists you do not host are better off without you. > We invite you to continue to discuss the issues and help us make the best > possible decision. Rather than monopolize the discussion on this list, if > you are interested, please join the discussion on our List Owner Advisory > Board list: mailto:owneradvisors-subscribe@topica.com. As a satisifed Topica non-user, I have no interest in participating in some in-house "advisory board." THIS forum exists to discuss issues of concern to list managers. If Topica continues to misbehave, it will continue to be discussed here, among other measures. If it does not, there is nothing to discuss, here or elsewhere. From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 19 14:42:33 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA10780; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 14:16:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Kitten.mcs.com (Kitten.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id OAA10773 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 14:16:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Mercury.mcs.net (dattier@Mercury.mcs.net [192.160.127.80]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.7/8.8.2) with ESMTP id QAA03013 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 16:16:44 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by Mercury.mcs.net (8.8.7/8.8.2) id QAA49198 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 16:16:44 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <199904192116.QAA49198@Mercury.mcs.net> Subject: IMRSS humans and IMRSS bots Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 16:16:43 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <24382.924509682@monkeys.com> from "Ronald F. Guilmette" at Apr 19, 99 01:14:42 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk When Norbert Bollow wrote, B> If the IMRSS people set up a robot to send out such notifications, then B> that would indeed be UBE. But when a human at IMRSS tries to contact B> whoever is in charge of any given open mail relay, that is not _bulk_ B> email. Ronald Guilmette responded, G> I can assure you that the question was raised only in the context of some G> *automated process* sending out the notifications. G> The IMRSS Project has already cataloged over 100,000 open relays. We most G> definitely DO NOT have anybody who is interested in volunteering to send out G> 100,000 personally composed messages. We're overlooking something. Automated notifications from IMRSS saying "You are running an open relay" are not intended to encourage actions that will line IMRSS's pockets in the end. So that in itself distinguishes it from spam, which is commercially motivated bulk email. From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 19 19:01:59 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA13897; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 18:48:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA13890 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 18:48:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA27698 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 18:50:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA20517 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 19:02:08 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: IMRSS humans and IMRSS bots In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 19 Apr 1999 16:16:43 -0500. <199904192116.QAA49198@Mercury.mcs.net> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 19:02:08 -0700 Message-ID: <20515.924573728@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <199904192116.QAA49198@Mercury.mcs.net>, "David W. Tamkin" wrote: >When Norbert Bollow wrote, > >B> If the IMRSS people set up a robot to send out such notifications, then >B> that would indeed be UBE. But when a human at IMRSS tries to contact >B> whoever is in charge of any given open mail relay, that is not _bulk_ >B> email. > >Ronald Guilmette responded, > >G> I can assure you that the question was raised only in the context of some >G> *automated process* sending out the notifications. > >G> The IMRSS Project has already cataloged over 100,000 open relays. We most >G> definitely DO NOT have anybody who is interested in volunteering to send ou >t >G> 100,000 personally composed messages. > >We're overlooking something. Automated notifications from IMRSS saying "You >are running an open relay" are not intended to encourage actions that will >line IMRSS's pockets in the end. So that in itself distinguishes it from >spam, which is commercially motivated bulk email. That may be YOUR definition, but it isn't mine. Nor is it the defintion used by a lot of other people either. Spam E-mail for most folks is just bulk unsolicited E-mail. It doesn't matter if it is ``commercial'' in the sense of trying to directly get your money or not. I have gotten spammed by people trying to elected. I have gotten spammed by people trying to make me a Christian. I have gotten spammed by people trying to make me a Hindu. Recently, I have gotten spammed by people trying to tell me what swell people the Serbs really are. All this stuff was spam, even though none of it was clearly ``commercial'' in nature. Likewise, if someone sent you a message saying ``Who is burried in Grant's Tomb?'' IF I and a million other people got that too, I can assure you that most people would consider it spam if they had no prior connection to or relationship with the sender. Fortunately, there are other ways to let people know they their local mail server is an open relay that is listed on the IMRSS list of open relays. The easiest way is just to block all mail from such servers. Many people are already doing just that. Another way is to do what I am now doing here... accept the mail but issue a 5xx error code *as if* you were rejecting the mail after the end of the DATA phase of the SMTP transaction. This makes it look to the sender like the mail bounced, but I still get to read what they sent me. Another way is to hack Sendmail so that each time it gets a message from an IMRSS-listed open relay server, it accepts the message but sends what amounts to an auto-responder response to the original message sender saying something like ``Hay! Your local mail server is being run in a substantially stupid and dangerous way! It is listed on the IMRSS list of open relays and as a result, mail from you may be blocked at many sites in the future. You should tell you local (lame) mail admin about this right away!'' I will be providing Sendmail patches to implement this one the IMRSS web site in the near future. In the meantime, I encourage you all to check the IMRSS web site, specifically: http://www.imrss.org/query.html to find out if your favorite local mail server is listed as an open relay by IMRSS. If it is, you may want to close it. -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 19 22:29:27 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA16121; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 22:22:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gsp.org (rsk.itw.com [208.211.3.21]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id WAA16114 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 22:22:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsk@localhost) by gsp.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA09868; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 01:23:49 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 01:23:42 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: dattier@Mcs.Net Subject: Re: IMRSS humans and IMRSS bots Message-ID: <19990420012342.A9842@gsp.org> References: <24382.924509682@monkeys.com> <199904192116.QAA49198@Mercury.mcs.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: <199904192116.QAA49198@Mercury.mcs.net>; from David W. Tamkin on Mon, Apr 19, 1999 at 04:16:43PM -0500 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Mon, Apr 19, 1999 at 04:16:43PM -0500, David W. Tamkin wrote: > So that in itself distinguishes it from > spam, which is commercially motivated bulk email. Wrong. Completely, utterly, totally wrong. Spam is slang for "unsolicited bulk email". The purpose or motivation, the content, the sender, the recipients, the method (e.g. directly sent or relayed) are all completely irrelevant in this definition, as they should and must be. ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk@gsp.org From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 19 22:59:27 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA16372; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 22:48:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Kitten.mcs.com (Kitten.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id WAA16365 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 22:48:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Venus.mcs.net (dattier@Venus.mcs.net [192.160.127.92]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.7/8.8.2) with ESMTP id AAA00304 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 00:48:34 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by Venus.mcs.net (8.8.7/8.8.2) id AAA42836 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 00:48:33 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <199904200548.AAA42836@Venus.mcs.net> Subject: Re: IMRSS humans and IMRSS bots Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 00:48:33 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <20515.924573728@monkeys.com> from "Ronald F. Guilmette" at Apr 19, 99 07:02:08 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Ron Guilmette wrote, | Spam E-mail for most folks is just bulk unsolicited E-mail. It doesn't | matter if it is ``commercial'' in the sense of trying to directly get your | money or not. | | I have gotten spammed by people trying to elected. And those people were sending it for their own gain. | I have gotten spammed by people trying to make me a Christian. | I have gotten spammed by people trying to make me a Hindu. And those people were sending it for their own gain ... to score points with those above them in their hierarchy or with their deities. | Recently, I have gotten spammed by people trying to tell me what swell | people the Serbs really are. Again, writing for their own benefit, not for yours. | All this stuff was spam, even though none of it was clearly ``commercial'' | in nature. Being "commercial" is not the issue. Being for the sender's benefit regard- less of the recipient's, or even to the detriment of the recipient if he or she goes along with it [greater detriment than the cost of receiving the messages], was the issue. | Likewise, if someone sent you a message saying ``Who is burried in Grant's | Tomb?'' IF I and a million other people got that too, I can assure you | that most people would consider it spam if they had no prior connection | to or relationship with the sender. Then they'd disagree with me on the definition of spam. Yes, I'd agree that it's rude and annoying and wrong, of course. | Fortunately, there are other ways to let people know they their local | mail server is an open relay that is listed on the IMRSS list of open | relays. [Ron lists some ways, and one was this:] | Another way is to hack Sendmail so that each time it gets a message from | an IMRSS-listed open relay server, it accepts the message but sends what | amounts to an auto-responder response to the original message sender saying | something like ``Hay! Your local mail server is being run in a substantially | stupid and dangerous way! It is listed on the IMRSS list of open relays and | as a result, mail from you may be blocked at many sites in the future. You | should tell you local (lame) mail admin about this right away!'' | I will be providing Sendmail patches to implement this one the IMRSS web | site in the near future. Please explain something: if someone gets mail through an open relay and reports it to IMRSS, and then IMRSS sends out a form letter to the insecure site to tell it that it is on IMRSS's list of sites running open relays, you call it unsolicited bulk email. But if your site gets mail from that relay and it sends an autoresponse to the insecure site saying the same thing, that is different? From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 20 01:29:39 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id BAA19082; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 01:28:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id BAA19075 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 01:28:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA02708 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 01:31:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA01061 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 01:42:43 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: IMRSS humans and IMRSS bots In-reply-to: Your message of Tue, 20 Apr 1999 00:48:33 -0500. <199904200548.AAA42836@Venus.mcs.net> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 01:42:43 -0700 Message-ID: <1059.924597763@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <199904200548.AAA42836@Venus.mcs.net>, "David W. Tamkin" wrote: >| Fortunately, there are other ways to let people know they their local >| mail server is an open relay that is listed on the IMRSS list of open >| relays. > >[Ron lists some ways, and one was this:] > >| Another way is to hack Sendmail so that each time it gets a message from >| an IMRSS-listed open relay server, it accepts the message but sends what >| amounts to an auto-responder response to the original message sender saying >| something like ``Hay! Your local mail server is being run in a substantiall >y >| stupid and dangerous way! It is listed on the IMRSS list of open relays and >| as a result, mail from you may be blocked at many sites in the future. You >| should tell you local (lame) mail admin about this right away!'' > >| I will be providing Sendmail patches to implement this one the IMRSS web >| site in the near future. > >Please explain something: if someone gets mail through an open relay and >reports it to IMRSS, and then IMRSS sends out a form letter to the insecure >site to tell it that it is on IMRSS's list of sites running open relays, you >call it unsolicited bulk email. But if your site gets mail from that relay >and it sends an autoresponse to the insecure site saying the same thing, that >is different? Yes. responding != spamming -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 20 12:29:29 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA28238; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 12:25:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Kitten.mcs.com (Kitten.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA28219 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 12:25:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Jupiter.mcs.net (dattier@Jupiter.mcs.net [192.160.127.88]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.7/8.8.2) with ESMTP id OAA22770 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 14:26:00 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by Jupiter.mcs.net (8.8.7/8.8.2) id OAA31819 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 14:25:58 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <199904201925.OAA31819@Jupiter.mcs.net> Subject: responding vs. spamming To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 14:25:58 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk When I asked Ron Guilmette, >Please explain something: if someone gets mail through an open relay and >reports it to IMRSS, and then IMRSS sends out a form letter to the insecure >site to tell it that it is on IMRSS's list of sites running open relays, you >call it unsolicited bulk email. But if your site gets mail from that relay >and it sends an autoresponse to the insecure site saying the same thing, that >is different? He explained, | Yes. responding != spamming How is it responding? postmaster@open.relay did not write email to postmaster@monkeys.com and is not expecting to hear from you any more than he or she is expecting to hear from IMRSS. It's as unsolicited coming from you as it would be from them. The IMRSS sends, "You accepted the following item via an open email relay and its end recipient asked us to notify you about it." You send, "You accepted the following item via an open email relay and tried to transmit it to us." The difference is too small to justify the chasm between condemning one and praising the other. Now, if you quietly refuse mail from the site whose relay is open and somehow its postmaster gets in touch with you to ask what is going on or to complain, and *then* you say something, that is responding and clearly not spamming. From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 20 15:59:32 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA00468; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 15:45:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA00455 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 15:45:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA20801 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 15:48:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA24635 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 15:59:59 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming In-reply-to: Your message of Tue, 20 Apr 1999 14:25:58 -0500. <199904201925.OAA31819@Jupiter.mcs.net> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 15:59:58 -0700 Message-ID: <24633.924649198@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <199904201925.OAA31819@Jupiter.mcs.net>, "David W. Tamkin" wrote: >When I asked Ron Guilmette, > >>Please explain something: if someone gets mail through an open relay and >>reports it to IMRSS, and then IMRSS sends out a form letter to the insecure >>site to tell it that it is on IMRSS's list of sites running open relays, you >>call it unsolicited bulk email. But if your site gets mail from that relay >>and it sends an autoresponse to the insecure site saying the same thing, that >>is different? > >He explained, > >| Yes. responding != spamming > >How is it responding? postmaster@open.relay did not write email to >postmaster@monkeys.com and is not expecting to hear from you any more than he >or she is expecting to hear from IMRSS. It's as unsolicited coming from you >as it would be from them. You misunderstood. The response would go back to the original mail sender... not to postmaster. -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 12:59:47 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA17753; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 12:48:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Kitten.mcs.com (Kitten.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA17746 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 12:48:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Mercury.mcs.net (dattier@Mercury.mcs.net [192.160.127.80]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.7/8.8.2) with ESMTP id OAA00631 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 14:48:45 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by Mercury.mcs.net (8.8.7/8.8.2) id OAA88081 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 14:48:39 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <199904211948.OAA88081@Mercury.mcs.net> Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 14:48:39 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <24633.924649198@monkeys.com> from "Ronald F. Guilmette" at Apr 20, 99 03:59:58 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Ronald Guilmette told me, | You misunderstood. Thank you for explaining a little further, but I still don't understand. | The response would go back to the original mail sender... not to postmaster. So you do not notify the people operating the open relay that their relay is open but rather you write to the originator (if you can find out who that is, as spammers are fond of forging). Then the autoresponse isn't unsolicited, and I see that now; while it may not come from an address to which the sender wrote, it was a report on the transmission of mail that he or she sent. Now I understand how it differs from an IMRSS notification to the postmaster at the open relay. But I'm still puzzled. What do you say in the autoresponse? "You used an open relay"? The sender already knows that, so you wouldn't bother saying so. "We know you used an open relay and you won't get away with it"? You know as well as I do that that won't do any good, so you wouldn't say that. What, then, do you say to the sender, and how can you be sure you're getting the real sender and not a victim of forged headers or forged envelopes? Also, if you aren't telling the operators of the open relay that their relay is open, does anybody tell them? From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 14:30:06 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA18843; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 14:24:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id OAA18836 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 14:24:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from solva.ifi.uio.no (1368@solva.ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.20]) by ifi.uio.no (8.8.8/8.8.7/ifi0.2) with SMTP id XAA23172; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 23:25:06 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from thomasg@localhost) by solva.ifi.uio.no ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 23:25:04 +0200 Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 23:25:03 +0200 From: Thomas Gramstad Reply-To: thomasg@ifi.uio.no To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Should iname.com be blacklisted? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I'm looking for some good advice for the following type of situation: 1. A subscriber sets a mail-forward from his current address at ISP 1 to a new address at ISP 2. 2. The subscriber's account at ISP 2 is closed, and address 2 produces error messages to the list manager. No clue to address 1 can be easily identified, but ISP 1 can be identified from the headers or contents of the error message. 3. When asked for help identifying the username and address, there is absolutely no response from postmaster at ISP 1, and ISP 1 is a big ISP that also offers domain names, so it's impossible to identify the subscriber address without their help. I'm just having one of these cases with postmaster@iname.com. I get an automated response that my message have been received and will be attended to, and then nothing. 4-5 days after my original request, I mailed them the following letter: ---begin-letter Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 18:52:16 +0200 From: Thomas Gramstad Reply-To: thomasg@ifi.uio.no To: postmaster@iname.com Subject: Notification of forwarded error messages. I have received no answer to my request, copyed below. Meanwhile, I continue to receive error messages. Since it is your (now defunct) user that is causing these error messages, it is your responsibility to help stop these error messages by providing the information that I asked for. I will not spend any more time writing more requests to you. Instead, I will simply forward all error messages I receive to you, until I get the infomation I need to stop them. This message, therefore, is a notification to you that you will receive such error messages, until that time. Thomas Gramstad thomasg@ifi.uio.no --------------- Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 01:55:07 +0200 From: Thomas Gramstad Reply-To: thomasg@ifi.uio.no To: postmaster@iname.com Subject: Request for address information Message-ID: Hello, I need to know which iname address is forwarding to the address kjellund@sn.no, so that I can remove the iname address from my mailing list. The address kjellund@sn.no no longer works and generates error messages. Regards, Thomas Gramstad thomasg@ifi.uio.no --------------- Return-Path: <> Received: from rmx07.globecomm.net (rmx07.iname.net [165.251.8.75]) by ifi.uio.no (8.8.8/8.8.7/ifi0.2) with ESMTP id BAA09468 for ; Sat, 10 Apr 1999 01:47:41 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from localhost by rmx07.globecomm.net (8.9.1/8.8.0) with = internal id TAA16150 Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 19:47:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Mail Delivery Subsystem Message-Id: <199904092347.TAA16150@rmx07.globecomm.net> To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=FElivery-status; boundary=3D"TAA16150.923701631/rmx07.globecomm.net" Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure) This is a MIME-encapsulated message --TAA16150.923701631/rmx07.globecomm.net The original message was received at Fri, 9 Apr 1999 19:47:09 -0400 (EDT) from lmtp08.iname.net [165.251.8.81] ** This is an automatic message to inform you that your email was not forwarded through iName's server. The iName email address that you tried to send mail to may not be active. Reasons for the failed delivery attempt could include: 1. The iName customer has selected a new personalized iName email address rendering their old iName email address inactive. 2. The iName customer may have signed up for one of iName's free offers and then not validated their forwarding address. 3 The address may simply be typed incorrectly. Please check that you typed the email address correctly. iName provides email users with a permanent, personalized and secure email address that is independent of how one accesses the Internet. iName acts as a global forwarding service. All email sent to a permanent iName address is automatically forwarded to a user specified destination email address. Please visit iName's Online Support Area at http://www.iname.com/info/intro/index.html for further information. ** ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to online.no.: >>> RCPT To: <<< 550 ... User unknown 550 ... User unknown --TAA16150.923701631/rmx07.globecomm.net Content-Type: message/delivery-status Reporting-MTA: dns; rmx07.globecomm.net Received-From-MTA: DNS; lmtp08.iname.net Arrival-Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 19:47:09 -0400 (EDT) Final-Recipient: RFC822; kjellund@sn.no Action: failed Status: 5.1.1 Remote-MTA: DNS; online.no Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 ... User unknown Last-Attempt-Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 19:47:10 -0400 (EDT) --TAA16150.923701631/rmx07.globecomm.net Content-Type: text/rfc822-headers Received: from smv19.iname.net by rmx07.globecomm.net (8.9.1/8.8.0) with = SMTP id TAA16143 ; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 19:47:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ifi.uio.no (IDENT:92@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by smv19.iname.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1SMV) with ESMTP id TAA21895; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 19:47:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mdomo@localhost) by ifi.uio.no (8.8.8/8.8.7/ifi0.2) id BAA08929; Sat, 10 Apr 1999 01:43:05 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 00:41:19 +0200 (MET DST) From: "Geir J. Netland" X-Sender: geinet@uhuru.misjonshs.no To: babcom@ifi.uio.no Subject: Star Wars i 60 minutes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=3DISO-8859-1 X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by ifi.uio.no id = BAA08923 Sender: owner-babcom@ifi.uio.no Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by smv19.iname.net id = TAA21895 --TAA16150.923701631/rmx07.globecomm.net-- ---end-letter As far as I'm concerned, iname.com is guilty of spamming if they don't do anything with such cases (and I'm sure they are common). At the very least I think that this behavior, or non-behavior as the case may be, qualifies for blacklisting. But is there anything I can do with this situation? And it is getting better, I've just got another case just like this one on one of my other lists, and that one is iname.com too. Thomas Gramstad thomasg@ifi.uio.no From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 16:45:17 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA20381; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 16:41:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id QAA20374 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 16:41:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA15302 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 16:44:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA00867 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 16:56:03 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 21 Apr 1999 14:48:39 -0500. <199904211948.OAA88081@Mercury.mcs.net> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 16:56:03 -0700 Message-ID: <865.924738963@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <199904211948.OAA88081@Mercury.mcs.net>, "David W. Tamkin" wrote: >Ronald Guilmette told me, > >| You misunderstood. > >Thank you for explaining a little further, but I still don't understand. > >| The response would go back to the original mail sender... not to postmaster. > >So you do not notify the people operating the open relay that their relay is >open... Not directly, no. Notifying the local users at the open relay site is better, because they will complain and get action. If you notify the local postmaster, he will (jsut as often as not) merely scratch his <>, shrug, and say to himself ``Yea... I gotten get that fixed. Probably have time to work on it in early August.'' > but rather you write to the originator ... >Then the autoresponse isn't unsolicited, and I see that now;... Good. >while it may not come from an address to which the sender >wrote, it was a report on the transmission of mail that he or she sent. Now >I understand... Good. >But I'm still puzzled. What do you say in the autoresponse? "You used an >open relay"? Probably something polite and friendly like: Dear End Luser, Did you know that your local mail system administrator is either as lazy as a sloth or else brain dead, or both? The local mail server you are using is open for rampant abouse by any Tom, Dick, or Spammer on the Internet, and this is due entirely to the fact that your local postmaster is either too lazy or too stupid to fix it. Regards, The Management Well.... OK, so maybe it won't be phrased quite like that. But you get the idea. >The sender already knows that... No. 99 times out of 100, an end user at the sending site DOES NOT know that his local mail server is an open relay. In fact 90 times out of 100, then won't even know what that even means exactly. So we will just tell them that their local mail server is f**ked up, and that they should tell their local mail server admin about that ASAP. >What, then, do you say to the sender... See above. >... and how can you be sure you're getting >the real sender and not a victim of forged headers or forged envelopes? Not my problem man. Look, you are trying to make an issue out of a non-issue. Sure, often spammers will send out (say) 100,000 message, all with forged sender envelope addresses of . In such cases, what happens to all of those message that are undeliverable? An attempt is made to bounce them back to and those attempts go nowhere. Result? No harm done, or else it all ends up in the mailbox of the postmaster for the open relay server that got hijacked... which serves him right for being such a dunce to run an open relay in the first place. But other times spammers will try to annoy and harass some anti-spammer, e.g. and will send out a big spam run with *this* address forged onto all of the envelopes. Result? I get treated to maybe 50,000 bounces from messages that I never even originated. This happens from time to time, and it is actionable (legally) whenever it does happen, because it is a clear Denial-of-Service attack on me and on my server(s). So if everybody on the planet statred using the kind of ``open relay noti- fications'' I mentioned TOMORROW (which isn't likely, but we will ignore that fact for the moment) then if a spammer hijacked a relay in Tasmania _and_ put _my_ address on the outgoing spams, I would get 50,000 bounces _and_ also (separately) 50,000 IMRSS open relay notifications. Does this make me really a whole lot worse off than if I _only_ got the 50,000 bounces?? Nope. Not really. I am drowing in a sea of crap either way, and it is a Denial-of-Service attack on me either way. In short, the addition of the IMRSS notifications doesn't really make a big difference either way, even in this highly unlikely scenario. Bottom line is that (as I said) you are just nit picking. This is a non- issue. >Also, if you aren't telling the operators of the open relay that their relay >is open, does anybody tell them? Presumably, the local lusers will, if not immmediately, then eventually. Eventually, they will get tired of rceiving the notifications whenever they send outgoing E-mail, and they will then bitch to the local mail system admin to fix the problem. Result? The open relay gets closed, and that leaves one less open relay on the net for spammers to screw around with. -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 17:02:06 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA20471; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 16:49:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from crabcake.akamai.com (access.akamai.com [4.17.143.9]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id QAA20464 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 16:48:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from claude.akamai.com (claude.akamai.com [10.10.123.141]) by crabcake.akamai.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10758 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 19:49:43 -0400 Received: (from dshaw@localhost) by claude.akamai.com (8.9.1/8.8.7) id TAA01469 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 19:49:49 -0500 Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 19:49:49 -0500 From: David Shaw To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming Message-ID: <19990421194947.A1437@jabberwocky.com> Mail-Followup-To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM References: <24633.924649198@monkeys.com> <199904211948.OAA88081@Mercury.mcs.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i In-Reply-To: <199904211948.OAA88081@Mercury.mcs.net>; from David W. Tamkin on Wed, Apr 21, 1999 at 02:48:39PM -0500 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CB3B415/2048/4D 96 83 18 2B AF BE 45 D0 07 C4 07 51 37 B3 18 X-URL: http://www.jabberwocky.com/ X-Phase-Of-Moon: The Moon is Waxing Crescent (42% of Full) X-Current-Email-Backlog: 213 X-Pointless-Random-Number: 151 X-Silly-Header: It sure is. X-Time-Til-Y2K: 36 weeks, 2 days, 4 hours, 41 minutes, 29 seconds Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, Apr 21, 1999 at 02:48:39PM -0500, David W. Tamkin wrote: > But I'm still puzzled. What do you say in the autoresponse? "You used an > open relay"? The sender already knows that, so you wouldn't bother saying > so. "We know you used an open relay and you won't get away with it"? You > know as well as I do that that won't do any good, so you wouldn't say that. > What, then, do you say to the sender, and how can you be sure you're getting > the real sender and not a victim of forged headers or forged envelopes? I suspect that most users *aren't* aware they are using an open relay. I imagine it would be more of a warning to the unknowing user that their ISP was misconfigured and therefore their mail would be rejected at a number of sites. While this misconfigured ISP may ignore outside requests to fix the open relay, their customer is in a better position to get the fix in. I think it's a good idea, but (as I mentioned on another list) I don't think that hacking sendmail to accept the mail while also refusing the mail is a good idea. There are some really broken mail systems out there that might not accept a 5xx response at that point in the transaction. I think that Ron's other suggestion of an automatic mailing back to the addresss (which may be forged, granted) is better. David -- David Shaw | dshaw@jabberwocky.com | WWW http://www.jabberwocky.com/ +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence." - Jeremy S. Anderson From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 17:45:19 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA21020; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 17:32:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from crabcake.akamai.com (access.akamai.com [4.17.143.9]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA21013 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 17:32:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from claude.akamai.com (claude.akamai.com [10.10.123.141]) by crabcake.akamai.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA11352 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 20:33:13 -0400 Received: (from dshaw@localhost) by claude.akamai.com (8.9.1/8.8.7) id UAA01539 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 20:33:17 -0500 Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 20:33:17 -0500 From: David Shaw To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Should iname.com be blacklisted? Message-ID: <19990421203317.B1437@jabberwocky.com> Mail-Followup-To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i In-Reply-To: ; from Thomas Gramstad on Wed, Apr 21, 1999 at 11:25:03PM +0200 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CB3B415/2048/4D 96 83 18 2B AF BE 45 D0 07 C4 07 51 37 B3 18 X-URL: http://www.jabberwocky.com/ X-Phase-Of-Moon: The Moon is Waxing Crescent (42% of Full) X-Current-Email-Backlog: 213 X-Pointless-Random-Number: 151 X-Silly-Header: It sure is. X-Time-Til-Y2K: 36 weeks, 2 days, 3 hours, 29 minutes, 39 seconds Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, Apr 21, 1999 at 11:25:03PM +0200, Thomas Gramstad wrote: > I'm looking for some good advice for the following type of situation: > > 1. A subscriber sets a mail-forward from his current address at ISP 1 > to a new address at ISP 2. > > 2. The subscriber's account at ISP 2 is closed, and address 2 > produces error messages to the list manager. No clue to address 1 > can be easily identified, but ISP 1 can be identified from the > headers or contents of the error message. > > 3. When asked for help identifying the username and address, there > is absolutely no response from postmaster at ISP 1, and ISP 1 is a > big ISP that also offers domain names, so it's impossible to > identify the subscriber address without their help. This is a case where VERP is a very, very, good thing. With regards to iname.com in particular, I went through exactly the same thing with them. I finally (after days of trying) called them up on the phone and said if they didn't help me, they were going to be blackholed. They then helped me. Unfortunately, based on your email address you seem to be in Norway, so it's not a cheap call. David -- David Shaw | dshaw@jabberwocky.com | WWW http://www.jabberwocky.com/ +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence." - Jeremy S. Anderson From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 18:30:38 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA21504; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 18:17:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gsp.org (rsk.itw.com [208.211.3.21]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA21497 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 18:17:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsk@localhost) by gsp.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA08457; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 21:18:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 21:18:24 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: Tina Lin Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Topica and Liszt - the straight dope Message-ID: <19990421211824.A8412@gsp.org> References: <19990418202035.B25001@gsp.org> <000901be8a74$354f9540$c8ecadce@topica.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: <000901be8a74$354f9540$c8ecadce@topica.com>; from Tina Lin on Mon, Apr 19, 1999 at 07:52:12AM -0700 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Mon, Apr 19, 1999 at 07:52:12AM -0700, Tina Lin wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > [mailto:list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM]On Behalf Of Rich Kulawiec > > Nice double-speak. Will Topica continue spamming or not? > > We have stopped notifying list owners. That's not an answer to the question that you were asked, but perhaps you misunderstood. I'm asking if Topica will continue *any* spamming activities of any kind. If the answer is "yes", then there's not much left to discuss, because my view is that spammers should be mercilessly obliterated, regardless of what else they might doing, no matter how useful or how well-intentioned. > We would really welcome your input, not just on this issue, but on other > ongoing issues. We have set up a public, unmoderated discussion list for > list owners interested in providing feedback. Hope to see some of you > there. I'm sorry, I don't understand why I should donate free consulting time to your business to solve problems that y'all should have solved before you started down this road. Maybe there *is* a way that you can somehow offer services related to mailing lists without usurping the authority of list-owners, violating their copyrights (and those of their subscribers), spamming, or any of the other pitfalls: I honestly don't know. If there is such a way, I wish you the best of luck in finding it. But I hardly think the onus is on the list-owner/manager community to undertake *your* education. That is up to *you*, and copious resources, from the archives of this mailing list (and others), FAQs, web sites, books, etc., all exist to facilitate it. In other words, if y'all wanna make the big start-up bucks, then *earn them*. ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk@gsp.org From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 19:45:10 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id TAA22342; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 19:32:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.235.116.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id TAA22333 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 19:32:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tpad.squawk.com (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA00960 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 22:33:24 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990421220552.03668ad0@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 22:05:52 -0400 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Nick Simicich Subject: Trouble at Juno Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I've been getting a lot of bounces from Juno lately. Junos gateways (some of them) negotiate ESMTP and say that they will do DSN and SIZE, and then they reject my standard sendmail formatted mail from command of the form: MAIL From: SIZE=28195 RET=HDRS With a 501 Unrecognised parameter in MAIL This only happens on some deliveries, they seem to be running several different levels of gateway software on different boxes. Some will not negotiate DSN and size, some will. Sometimes Juno accepts the above MAIL From, sometimes they will not. Has anyone else seen this? Is it only happening to me because I tell sendmail to return headers only? -- We will fight for bovine freedom, And hold our large heads high. We will run free, with the buffalo or die! Cows with Guns. - Dana Lyons, Cows With Guns Nick Simicich mailto:njs@scifi.squawk.com or (last choice) mailto:njs@us.ibm.com http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html -- Stop by and Light Up The World! From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 20:45:12 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id UAA23208; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 20:43:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dewey.mindlink.net (dewey.mindlink.net [204.174.16.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id UAA23201 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 20:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from l002.abb.dial.paralynx.net ([204.174.29.130] helo=Main) by dewey.mindlink.net with smtp (Exim 2.11 #5) id 10aAPF-0003fC-00; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 20:44:05 -0700 From: "Mally" To: thomasg@ifi.uio.no, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 20:45:57 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: Quoted-printable Subject: Re: Should iname.com be blacklisted? In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Message-Id: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk cnn.com is the promotor of the free email service that offers iname.com as well as three other choices of freebie email addresses through a remailler called Mail.com (www.Mail.com). So you're looking at blacklisting CNN and Mail.com. DNS Admin. contact for iName: dnsadministration@INAMECORP.COM On an ISP trace I got: "Searches for .no can be run at http://www.ripe.net/db/whois.html " To answer your subject header question, YES! I read through the consent agreement at CNN for using CNN's/Mail.com free email service and it stinks IMO. They can give out any and all registrant info to whoever they want AFAICS as well as the email addresses - both legitimate and the Mail.com ones. That, in addition to the headaches they're obviously going to be to mail list owners, is enough to put me right off them. Not much use to you I'm afraid, but IMO I wouldn't accept any sub's coming from Mail.com (you can find all their choices of .com addresses at the CNN free email site, probably at their web site too) without a legitimate, confirmed address from the subscriber or else filter & delete all of Mail.com's phony .com addresses out of your incoming mail. Mally :) > I'm looking for some good advice for the following type of situation: > > 1. A subscriber sets a mail-forward from his current address at ISP 1 to= a > new address at ISP 2. > > 2. The subscriber's account at ISP 2 is closed, and address 2 > produces error messages to the list manager. No clue to address 1 > can be easily identified, but ISP 1 can be identified from the > headers or contents of the error message. > > 3. When asked for help identifying the username and address, there > is absolutely no response from postmaster at ISP 1, and ISP 1 is a > big ISP that also offers domain names, so it's impossible to > identify the subscriber address without their help. > > I'm just having one of these cases with postmaster@iname.com. I > get an automated response that my message have been received and > will be attended to, and then nothing. 4-5 days after my original > request, I mailed them the following letter: > > ---begin-letter > > Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 18:52:16 +0200 > From: Thomas Gramstad > Reply-To: thomasg@ifi.uio.no > To: postmaster@iname.com > Subject: Notification of forwarded error messages. > > I have received no answer to my request, copyed below. Meanwhile, > I continue to receive error messages. Since it is your (now > defunct) user that is causing these error messages, it is your > responsibility to help stop these error messages by providing > the information that I asked for. I will not spend any more time > writing more requests to you. Instead, I will simply forward all > error messages I receive to you, until I get the infomation I need > to stop them. This message, therefore, is a notification to you > that you will receive such error messages, until that time. > > Thomas Gramstad > thomasg@ifi.uio.no > > --------------- > > Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 01:55:07 +0200 > From: Thomas Gramstad > Reply-To: thomasg@ifi.uio.no > To: postmaster@iname.com > Subject: Request for address information > Message-ID: > > Hello, > > I need to know which iname address is forwarding to the address > kjellund@sn.no, so that I can remove the iname address from my > mailing list. The address kjellund@sn.no no longer works and > generates error messages. > > Regards, > > Thomas Gramstad > thomasg@ifi.uio.no > > --------------- > > Return-Path: <> > Received: from rmx07.globecomm.net (rmx07.iname.net [165.251.8.75]) > by ifi.uio.no (8.8.8/8.8.7/ifi0.2) with ESMTP id BAA09468 > for ; Sat, 10 Apr 1999 01:47:41 +0200 (MET DST= ) > Received: from localhost by rmx07.globecomm.net (8.9.1/8.8.0) with > internal id TAA16150 Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 19:47:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Ma= il > Delivery Subsystem Message-Id: > <199904092347.TAA16150@rmx07.globecomm.net> To: > MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; > report-type=FElivery-status; > boundary=3D"TAA16150.923701631/rmx07.globecomm.net" > Subject: Returned mail: User unknown > Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure) > > This is a MIME-encapsulated message > > --TAA16150.923701631/rmx07.globecomm.net > > The original message was received at Fri, 9 Apr 1999 19:47:09 -0400 (EDT= ) > from lmtp08.iname.net [165.251.8.81] > > ** > This is an automatic message to inform you that your email was not > forwarded through iName's server. > > The iName email address that you tried to send mail to may not be active= From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 21:01:43 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id UAA23491; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 20:52:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id UAA23483 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 20:52:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cantec.com (ns1.cantec.com [206.31.250.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA01646 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 17:36:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www ([206.31.250.15]) by cantec.com with SMTP (IPAD 2.08) id 3411000 ; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 19:39:21 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19990421002947.00f8c088@cantec.com> X-Sender: dbigham@cantec.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 20:29:47 -0400 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Dave Bigham Subject: Popular e-zines Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Does anyone know of information on what the popular and most popular e-zines and mailing list subjects are? I am interested in knowing the types of mailing lists people tend to subscribe to in large numbers. Please note! This is in NO way connected to any spamming attempt. I have been approached about a venture involving e-zines and mailing lists and am interested in what's already out there and what are popular subjects. Thanks. Dave Bigham From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 21:33:31 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA23954; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 21:27:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id VAA23947 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 21:27:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA10537 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 21:31:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA08923 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 21:42:37 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 21 Apr 1999 19:49:49 -0500. <19990421194947.A1437@jabberwocky.com> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 21:42:36 -0700 Message-ID: <8921.924756156@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <19990421194947.A1437@jabberwocky.com>, David Shaw wrote: >I think it's a good idea, but (as I mentioned on another list) I don't >think that hacking sendmail to accept the mail while also refusing the >mail is a good idea. There are some really broken mail systems out there >that might not accept a 5xx response at that point in the transaction. Other people have speculated about this also. Nonetheless, all I have at this point is speculation. Nobody has yet shown me one living breathing example of an SMTP sending agent that will go berzerk or do Bad Things if it gets a 5xx error after the DATA phase of the transaction. So I gotta treat it a lot like the Loch Ness monster... yea, maybe it *does* exist, but I ain't gonna plan my weekend around it. -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 21:47:20 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA24013; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 21:32:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id VAA23994 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 21:32:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 23887 invoked by uid 100); 22 Apr 1999 00:32:39 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 00:32:38 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Should iname.com be blacklisted? In-Reply-To: <19990421203317.B1437@jabberwocky.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > 3. When asked for help identifying the username and address, there > > is absolutely no response from postmaster at ISP 1, and ISP 1 is a > > big ISP that also offers domain names, so it's impossible to > > identify the subscriber address without their help. I agree that iname is not very helpful, but zombie forwarding addresses are a chronic problem all over the place and getting iname to help won't solve your problem. The only real solution is to send uniquely identifiable messages to each address on the list, either using VERP or an actual set of "ignore this list cleaning test message, your address is " and see which one comes back. If you don't use VERP, occasional per-address confirmation tests are a good idea. I believe that LISTSERV lists typically do them every six months. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 22:46:58 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA24677; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 22:31:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dewey.mindlink.net (dewey.mindlink.net [204.174.16.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id WAA24670 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 22:31:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from l017.abb.dial.paralynx.net ([204.174.29.145] helo=Main) by dewey.mindlink.net with smtp (Exim 2.11 #5) id 10aC5t-0002dj-00 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 22:32:13 -0700 From: "Mally" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 22:34:05 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Should iname.com be blacklisted? X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Message-Id: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk cnn.com is the promotor of the free email service that offers iname.com as well as three other choices of freebie email addresses through a remailler called Mail.com (www.Mail.com). So you're looking at blacklisting CNN and Mail.com. DNS Admin. contact for iName: dnsadministration@INAMECORP.COM On an ISP trace I got: "Searches for .no can be run at http://www.ripe.net/db/whois.html " To answer your subject header question, YES! I read through the consent agreement at CNN for using CNN's/Mail.com free email service and it stinks IMO. They can give out any and all registrant info to whoever they want AFAICS as well as the email addresses - both legitimate and the Mail.com ones. That, in addition to the headaches they're obviously going to be to mail list owners, is enough to put me right off them. Not much use to you I'm afraid, but IMO I wouldn't accept any sub's coming from Mail.com (you can find all their choices of .com addresses at the CNN free email site, probably at their web site too) without a legitimate, confirmed address from the subscriber or else filter & delete all of Mail.com's phony .com addresses out of your incoming mail. Mally :) > I'm looking for some good advice for the following type of situation: > > 1. A subscriber sets a mail-forward from his current address at ISP 1 to > a new address at ISP 2. > > 2. The subscriber's account at ISP 2 is closed, and address 2 > produces error messages to the list manager. No clue to address 1 > can be easily identified, but ISP 1 can be identified from the > headers or contents of the error message. > > 3. When asked for help identifying the username and address, there > is absolutely no response from postmaster at ISP 1, and ISP 1 is a > big ISP that also offers domain names, so it's impossible to > identify the subscriber address without their help. > > I'm just having one of these cases with postmaster@iname.com. I > get an automated response that my message have been received and > will be attended to, and then nothing. 4-5 days after my original > request, I mailed them the following letter: > > ---begin-letter ~~~snip~~~ > As far as I'm concerned, iname.com is guilty of spamming if they > don't do anything with such cases (and I'm sure they are common). > At the very least I think that this behavior, or non-behavior as > the case may be, qualifies for blacklisting. > > But is there anything I can do with this situation? > > And it is getting better, I've just got another case just like > this one on one of my other lists, and that one is iname.com too. > > Thomas Gramstad > thomasg@ifi.uio.no From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 23:01:39 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA24740; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 22:34:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Kitten.mcs.com (Kitten.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id WAA24733 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 22:34:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Jupiter.mcs.net (dattier@Jupiter.mcs.net [192.160.127.88]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.7/8.8.2) with ESMTP id AAA02432 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 00:35:04 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by Jupiter.mcs.net (8.8.7/8.8.2) id AAA04644 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 00:35:03 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <199904220535.AAA04644@Jupiter.mcs.net> Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 00:35:03 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <865.924738963@monkeys.com> from "Ronald F. Guilmette" at Apr 21, 99 04:56:03 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Ron Guilmette replied to my post, | Look, you are trying to make an issue out of a non-issue. No, I'm not trying to make any issues; I'm trying to understand what you said you do. | Notifying the local users at the open relay site is better, because they | will complain and get action. If you notify the local postmaster, he will | (jsut as often as not) merely scratch his <>, shrug, | and say to himself ``Yea... I gotten get that fixed. Probably have time | to work on it in early August.'' And obviously I didn't understand. I had the impression that you send these notifications in reaction to mail that uses an open relay. Apparently you do not; rather you send them in reaction to mail that originates on a site that you know from previous deliveries to have an open relay. | >The sender already knows that [he or she used an open relay]. When I said that, I thought that you sent the autoresponse when you get mail that was relayed through the insecure server, so by "the sender" I meant the party who used that hole. Now, for the first time -- or at least for the first time that I've understood it -- you're saying you send it to local users of an insecure server. Probably it's my fault rather than yours, because David Shaw knew what you meant. But how can mail that originates on a server tell you whether it runs an open relay? I'm under the impression that it cannot, and you must know that the originating site is insecure based on having its IP address on file from earlier mail that it trustingly relayed but should not have. And *that* is the type of mail for which I thought you were sending this autoresponse. | No. 99 times out of 100, an end user at the sending site DOES NOT know | that his local mail server is an open relay. In fact 90 times out of 100, | then won't even know what that even means exactly. Absolutely right. In fact, I'd say that the second sentence's "90" is a conservative estimate. | >... and how can you be sure you're getting | >the real sender and not a victim of forged headers or forged envelopes? | | Not my problem man. Again, I was thinking you sent this autoresponse in reaction to mail that used the relay; I didn't understand that you sent it in reaction to mail that originates on sites that had were on record as running open relays. My ques- tion there applied to what I thought was the case. *Now* I understand that it is not relevant. | But other times spammers will try to annoy and harass some anti-spammer, | e.g. and will send out a big spam run with *this* address | forged onto all of the envelopes. Yup, it even happened once to a long-canceled but still forwarded address of mine. | Bottom line is that (as I said) you are just nit picking. This is a non- | issue. I wasn't nitpicking; I was asking. You read my comments in the context of what you are actually doing because you thought I knew. In the reference frame of what I thought you were doing, they're not so nitpicky. There's a saying that one should never attribute to malice anything that can be ex- plained by stupidity; please, Ron, don't attribute to nit picking something that should be explained by thickheadedness. | >Also, if you aren't telling the operators of the open relay that their relay | >is open, does anybody tell them? | | Presumably, the local lusers will, if not immmediately, then eventually. Yes, sure (now that I know you're telling local users). When I thought you were telling it to misusers of the open relay, my question made sense. | Eventually, they will get tired of rceiving the notifications whenever they | send outgoing E-mail, and they will then bitch to the local mail system | admin to fix the problem. I was in that very position on an ISP where I have since, for other reasons (they fixed their relay problems), canceled service. You are preaching to the choir there. Thanks for clearing up my misunderstanding. From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 21 23:16:19 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id XAA25035; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 23:00:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dewey.mindlink.net (dewey.mindlink.net [204.174.16.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id XAA25013 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 23:00:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from l021.abb.dial.paralynx.net ([204.174.29.149] helo=Main) by dewey.mindlink.net with smtp (Exim 2.11 #5) id 10aCXq-0004IR-00 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 23:01:06 -0700 From: "Mally" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 23:02:59 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming References: Your message of Wed, 21 Apr 1999 14:48:39 -0500. <199904211948.OAA88081@Mercury.mcs.net> In-reply-to: <865.924738963@monkeys.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Message-Id: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "Ronald F. Guilmette" wrote: ~~~snipped~~~ > Probably something polite and friendly like: > > Dear End Luser, In my case, maybe to my list's ISP? - see below... > Did you know that your local mail system administrator is > either as lazy as a sloth or else brain dead, or both? > > The local mail server you are using is open for rampant > abouse by any Tom, Dick, or Spammer on the Internet, and > this is due entirely to the fact that your local postmaster > is either too lazy or too stupid to fix it. > > Regards, > > The Management LOL > Well.... OK, so maybe it won't be phrased quite like that. But you get > the idea. > No. 99 times out of 100, an end user at the sending site DOES NOT know > that his local mail server is an open relay. In fact 90 times out of 100, > then won't even know what that even means exactly. So we will just tell > them that their local mail server is f**ked up, and that they should tell > their local mail server admin about that ASAP. Our list was down this weekend, no techie help available, phones all put on voice mail. The reason given later in the week: "Mail to the list, and everyone else, was delayed because of a spam attack that drove the load on the mail server up to a level where it stopped delivering mail in order to apply resources to continuing to accept mail rather than failing outright. Note that your mail was delayed by the delayed delivery and also my taking the input spool offline in order to remove the spam. That despamming took a few hours because of the volume of mail." Trying to figure out from what you said if I should send a copy of your letter to the techie concerned? TIA Mally :) > -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, > Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: > http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - > http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering > - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 00:16:07 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id AAA25663; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 00:12:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id AAA25631 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 00:12:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA23422; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 00:15:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA14479; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 00:27:15 -0700 To: thomasg@ifi.uio.no, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Should iname.com be blacklisted? In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 21 Apr 1999 20:45:57 -0700. From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 00:27:14 -0700 Message-ID: <14477.924766034@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , "Mally" wrote: >cnn.com is the promotor of the free email service that offers >iname.com as well as three other choices of freebie email addresses >through a remailler called Mail.com (www.Mail.com). So you're >looking at blacklisting CNN and Mail.com. FYI - iname.com == Mail.Com It's the same company, just a new name (Mail.Com). -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 01:58:39 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id BAA27259; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 01:24:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id BAA27252 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 01:24:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA07290 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 01:27:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA17356 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 01:39:08 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 22 Apr 1999 00:35:03 -0500. <199904220535.AAA04644@Jupiter.mcs.net> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 01:39:07 -0700 Message-ID: <17354.924770347@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <199904220535.AAA04644@Jupiter.mcs.net>, "David W. Tamkin" wrote: >But how can mail that originates on a server tell you whether it runs an open >relay? I'm under the impression that it cannot... You're right. It can't. >... and you must know that the >originating site is insecure based on having its IP address on file from >earlier mail that it trustingly relayed but should not have. Correct. The Goal of the IMRSS Project is to construct a large list of exactly such IP addresses. And in fact, the IMRSS Project has _already_ amassed a rather massive list of IP addresses of proven open mail relays... maybe even including YOUR OWN local mail server. (I hesitate to tell you how big the list actually is because I don't want people running open relays to use this as an excuse for not fixing their own open relays... ``Hey! Zillions of other people have open relays! So why should we hurry to fix our's?? Why are you picking on us??'') -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 05:29:50 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id FAA02035; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 05:23:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from numen.elon.edu (numen.elon.edu [152.33.3.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id FAA02028 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 05:23:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (rose@localhost) by numen.elon.edu (8.8.6 (PHNE_14041)/8.8.6) with SMTP id IAA17418; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 08:22:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 08:22:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Tony Rose To: Nick Simicich cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Trouble at Juno In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19990421220552.03668ad0@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk My mailq often fills up (weekly) with Juno outgoing mail. They must go down a lot. However, they usually come back up before the mail starts to bounce. ________________________________ Tony Rose Elon College Unix/Email Administrator E: rose@elon.edu V: (336)538-6815 F: (336)584-2447 2400 Campus Box Elon College, NC 27244 ________________________________ On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Nick Simicich wrote: > I've been getting a lot of bounces from Juno lately. Junos gateways (some > of them) negotiate ESMTP and say that they will do DSN and SIZE, and then > they reject my standard sendmail formatted mail from command of the form: > > MAIL From: SIZE=28195 RET=HDRS > > With a > > 501 Unrecognised parameter in MAIL > > This only happens on some deliveries, they seem to be running several > different levels of gateway software on different boxes. Some will not > negotiate DSN and size, some will. Sometimes Juno accepts the above MAIL > From, sometimes they will not. > > Has anyone else seen this? Is it only happening to me because I tell > sendmail to return headers only? > > > -- > We will fight for bovine freedom, And hold our large heads high. > We will run free, with the buffalo or die! Cows with Guns. - Dana Lyons, > Cows With Guns > Nick Simicich mailto:njs@scifi.squawk.com or (last choice) > mailto:njs@us.ibm.com > http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html -- Stop by and Light Up The World! > From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 06:45:38 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id GAA02824; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 06:35:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from socrates.uophx.edu (socrates.uophx.edu [204.17.17.98]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id GAA02813; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 06:35:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (sgmiller@localhost) by socrates.uophx.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA14270; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 06:42:17 -0700 Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 06:42:17 -0700 (MST) From: "Steven G. Miller" To: Majordomo-Users , list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Hiding a list in Majordomo 1.94.4 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Sorry for Cross Posts Could someone please e-mail off-line and share with me the wisdom of how to edit the following *.config file lines so that a list does not appear in the lists command? Thanks! #noadvertise noadvertise << END END From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 07:14:49 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA03294; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 07:13:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.235.116.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id HAA03285 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 07:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tpad.squawk.com (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA25238 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 10:13:46 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990422075907.03995100@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 07:59:07 -0400 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: Should iname.com be blacklisted? In-Reply-To: <19990421203317.B1437@jabberwocky.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I have a delivery script that replaces bulk_mailer. I always use it to deliver digests. It puts in an extra header that gives the original recipient and unbulks the delivery - a separate piece of mail for every recipient and so forth so that I can get positive tracking. I always deliver digests using a similar procedure. When I get desparate, I plug this in to the delivery alias and let a delivery go through on the regular list. I really hate the stupid alum relays at MIT. One of my users relays from MIT to mcimail and his mailbox fills up. The bounces from mci make it pretty impossible to figure anythng out. I finally wrote special bounce parsers that look for alum in the received headers and just move this guy to digest. I guess that the point is that such bounces and relays are always going to happen. I've had Lotus systems scrub tracking headers out of stuff I've sent them and all sorts of crap. We can only hope that more people adopt DSN and preserve the original recipient. -- Do you have 10 years experience? Or one month's experience repeated 120 times? Nick Simicich mailto:njs@scifi.squawk.com or (last choice) mailto:njs@us.ibm.com http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html -- Stop by and Light Up The World! From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 08:15:13 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id IAA04009; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 08:00:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from crabcake.akamai.com (access.akamai.com [4.17.143.9]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id IAA03987 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 08:00:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from claude.akamai.com (crabcake.akamai.com [10.10.123.10]) by crabcake.akamai.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA18275 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 11:00:47 -0400 Received: (from dshaw@localhost) by claude.akamai.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA01665 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 11:00:47 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 11:00:46 -0400 From: David Shaw To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming Message-ID: <19990422110046.A1585@jabberwocky.com> Mail-Followup-To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM References: <19990421194947.A1437@jabberwocky.com> <8921.924756156@monkeys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i In-Reply-To: <8921.924756156@monkeys.com>; from Ronald F. Guilmette on Wed, Apr 21, 1999 at 09:42:36PM -0700 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CB3B415/2048/4D 96 83 18 2B AF BE 45 D0 07 C4 07 51 37 B3 18 X-URL: http://www.jabberwocky.com/ X-Phase-Of-Moon: The Moon is Waxing Crescent (48% of Full) X-Current-Email-Backlog: 223 X-Pointless-Random-Number: 171 X-Silly-Header: It sure is. X-Time-Til-Y2K: 36 weeks, 1 days, 14 hours, 11 minutes, 54 seconds Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, Apr 21, 1999 at 09:42:36PM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > > In message <19990421194947.A1437@jabberwocky.com>, > David Shaw wrote: > > >I think it's a good idea, but (as I mentioned on another list) I don't > >think that hacking sendmail to accept the mail while also refusing the > >mail is a good idea. There are some really broken mail systems out there > >that might not accept a 5xx response at that point in the transaction. > > Other people have speculated about this also. > > Nonetheless, all I have at this point is speculation. Nobody has yet > shown me one living breathing example of an SMTP sending agent that > will go berzerk or do Bad Things if it gets a 5xx error after the DATA > phase of the transaction. Alan Brown on rbl-discuss mentioned the AppleShare IP Mail Server 5.0. To quote: "One's currently belting on my main mailserver, to the tune of 20,000 connects in the last 24 hours." I think it doesn't take 5xx for an answer, period, rather than just after the DATA phase, but that is probably immaterial here. Now, I'll grant you there are a few more sendmail installations in the world than AppleShare, but it is a "living breathing example". He also mentioned several (unnamed) mailing list systems that don't "take 5xx for an answer". What was so bad about your other idea (generating a brand new message instead of trying to generate a bounce via a sendmail hack) ? It may not be as satisfying (in the case of a forgery, your response will probably go nowhere, rather than to the postmaster of the relay machine) but do you really trust every programmer who is working on mail systems to always get it right? As a general rule, I try not to rely on other people doing the Right Thing on the Internet. With your sendmail hack, if someone *else* makes a mistake, *I* get mailbombed as the remote MTA repeatedly tries again. There are also issues with secondary (tertiary, etc) MX machines. With the generate-a-new-message idea, if someone else makes a mistake, nothing happens at all. David -- David Shaw | dshaw@jabberwocky.com | WWW http://www.jabberwocky.com/ +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence." - Jeremy S. Anderson From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 12:47:47 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA07486; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 12:34:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA07479 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 12:34:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA15067 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 12:38:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA02506 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 12:49:53 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 22 Apr 1999 11:00:46 -0400. <19990422110046.A1585@jabberwocky.com> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 12:49:53 -0700 Message-ID: <2504.924810593@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <19990422110046.A1585@jabberwocky.com>, David Shaw wrote: >On Wed, Apr 21, 1999 at 09:42:36PM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: >> Nonetheless, all I have at this point is speculation. Nobody has yet >> shown me one living breathing example of an SMTP sending agent that >> will go berzerk or do Bad Things if it gets a 5xx error after the DATA >> phase of the transaction. > >Alan Brown on rbl-discuss mentioned the AppleShare IP Mail Server 5.0. >To quote: "One's currently belting on my main mailserver, to the tune of >20,000 connects in the last 24 hours." I think it doesn't take 5xx for an >answer... ^^^^^^^ Do you grasp the difference between speculation and definitive evidence? ``I think'' that you were actually the second gunman who was on the grassy knoll on that crisp November day in 1963 back in Dallas. So should we lock you up? >Now, I'll grant you there are a few more sendmail installations in the >world than AppleShare, but it is a "living breathing example". No, it's speculation, and no even very substantial speculation. >He also >mentioned several (unnamed) mailing list systems that don't "take 5xx for >an answer". He said that he _believed_ there may be some such. He didn't say that he actually knew of any. I believe that the Loch Ness monster exists... and I have video tapes of it! Want you buy some? Only $39.95 a tape! Hey! Such a deal. Send me your credit card number. >What was so bad about your other idea (generating a brand new message >instead of trying to generate a bounce via a sendmail hack) ? Either approach works for me. >It may not be as satisfying (in the case of a forgery, your response will >probably go nowhere... In the case of a 5xx triggered bounce, that also will go nowhere if the envelope sender address was forged (and bogus). >... rather than to the postmaster of the relay machine) >but do you really trust every programmer who is working on mail systems to >always get it right? No, but neither do I have a fallout shelter/bunker in my backyard. I don't make plans around unlikely possibilities and/or idle speculations about really weird stuff that _may_ happen. Hell! The Sun might suddenly go nova! I guess I'd better rush down to the local Thrify's and pick up some of that SPF 5,000 sun block! :-) -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 13:55:45 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA08290; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 13:43:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id NAA08277 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 13:43:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 26205 invoked by uid 100); 22 Apr 1999 16:44:37 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 16:44:37 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: "Steven G. Miller" cc: Majordomo-Users , list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Hiding a list in Majordomo 1.94.4 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk noadvertise << END /./ END Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 14:24:13 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA08408; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 13:50:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id NAA08401 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 13:50:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 26479 invoked by uid 100); 22 Apr 1999 16:51:42 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 16:51:38 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Nick Simicich cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: indecipherable bounce messages In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19990422075907.03995100@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I really hate the stupid alum relays at MIT. Same here. MIT has the only mail systems that reliably and deliberately break bounce handling so badly that it defeats VERP. I have a bunch of majordomo lists, and each message goes out with an envelope address like: majordom-virt-list-user=domain@iecc.com where virt identifies the virtual domain where the list lives, list is the list name with punctuation squeezed out, and user=domain is the user@domain recipient address. It happens that the mail host is named ivan.iecc.com, so MIT's mailer rewrites bounce addresses to: majordom-virt-list-user=domain%iecc.com@ivan.iecc.com For one thing, I don't permit the percent hack and don't know anyone else who does, since it practically begs spammers to use you for a relay. For another, although ivan.iecc.com is a host, it's not a domain that accepts mail because other than MIT's brain-damaged bounces, 100% of mail to that domain is spam to addresses scraped from usenet headers. I have daily security logs that show me attempts to relay through here, and I can recognize the MIT bounces and handle them by hand, but I don't understand why they think what they're doing is a good idea. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 14:57:02 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA09107; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:09:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id OAA09097 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ifolk.iserver.net (ifolk.iserver.net [192.41.44.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id GAA13106 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 06:21:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from patroon ([160.43.47.9]) by ifolk.iserver.net (8.8.5) id HAA06650; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 07:22:06 -0600 (MDT) From: "Tom Neff" To: Subject: IMRSS notification considered NOT SPAM Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 09:22:53 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2212 (4.71.2419.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.0810.800 In-Reply-To: <199904210800.BAA07265@honor.greatcircle.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk IMRSS open-relay notification is NOT spam because it is an Internet public safety function. That is the only content based exemption that should be recognized. They should go on about their work without worrying about being hassled as spammers. From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 15:02:24 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA09194; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:10:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id OAA09184 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:10:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bigtime.blank.org (bigtime.blank.org [139.167.64.222]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id RAA21153 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 17:48:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 11403 invoked by uid 500); 22 Apr 1999 00:49:00 -0000 Message-ID: <19990421204900.K3829@blank.org> Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 20:49:00 -0400 From: "Nathan J. Mehl" To: thomasg@ifi.uio.no, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Should iname.com be blacklisted? References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i In-Reply-To: ; from Thomas Gramstad on Wed, Apr 21, 1999 at 11:25:03PM +0200 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Okay, massive disclaimer here. I work for Mail.Com, formerly iName. I could, in fact, be called its postmaster. On behalf of the company, I will say this: our customer service department is dedicated and hardworking, but in any service group things will sometimes be accidentally overlooked or dropped. The phone numbers in our NIC records, the phone book and in our media kit will connect you to real, live human beings if you feel that an issue has been overlooked or not responded to in a timely fashion. We strive to be a good neighbor on the net, and believe that in general we achieve that, and we WANT to hear from you if you see differently. I believe that you have simply been unlucky in the amount of time it took to have the problem fixed. There are over five million iName users -- we are not a small company and it is possible for it to take some time to respond to requests. We generally meet a 5-hour turnaround on most customer-service issues -- you have my apologies on our behalf that this took so much longer. I have located the account causing you the problem and de-activated it. You should see a more indicative bounce message shortly. And that's it for the company. From here on down, I'm speaking for myself: In the immortal words of Thomas Gramstad (thomasg@ifi.uio.no): > > 2. The subscriber's account at ISP 2 is closed, and address 2 > produces error messages to the list manager. No clue to address 1 > can be easily identified, but ISP 1 can be identified from the > headers or contents of the error message. This has been a general problem for list managers (myself included) since the first mailing list was created. Several mailing list managers include features to help deal with it, and two MTAs (qmail and postfix) implement Variable Envelope Response Paths to solve the problem permanently. > I have received no answer to my request, copyed below. Meanwhile, > I continue to receive error messages. Since it is your (now > defunct) user that is causing these error messages, it is your > responsibility to help stop these error messages by providing > the information that I asked for. I will not spend any more time > writing more requests to you. Instead, I will simply forward all > error messages I receive to you, until I get the infomation I need > to stop them. This message, therefore, is a notification to you > that you will receive such error messages, until that time. While I sympathize with your frustration in not getting an immediate response, I think its safe to say that threats of annoyance/harassment are IN GENERAL a good way to get one's request -- however otherwise reasonable -- taken less seriously. > As far as I'm concerned, iname.com is guilty of spamming if they > don't do anything with such cases (and I'm sure they are common). I doubt you could get get very many people to consider this to be spamming. A bounce message, however annoying, is not unsolicited mail -- it is part and parcel of the entire SMTP mail process. At worst, you could call this negligence, but I do not believe that this problem is significantly worst for iName than for any service which offers large number of email accounts. We would like to be proactive in checking for "dangling" forwarding accounts, but there are difficult privacy issues involved with that -- if we sent all of our forwarding customers a "test" message every month, they'd probably start to get annoyed with us quickly, and these days few or no mail servers implement the EXPN or VRFY commands, so we can't use those... > At the very least I think that this behavior, or non-behavior as > the case may be, qualifies for blacklisting. Honestly, this is silly. The forwarding problem has existed since long before iName or any other free email service, and going five days without hearing a response to a postmaster mail, while aggravating, is hardly in itself reason to do anything more drastic than, say, block out a domain locally. Yours, -Nathan J. Mehl speaking for himself ------------------------------------------------------------ "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (PKD) ------------------------------------------------ From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 16:46:19 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA11192; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 16:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from crabcake.akamai.com (access.akamai.com [4.17.143.9]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id QAA11185 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 16:38:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from claude.akamai.com (claude.akamai.com [10.10.123.141]) by crabcake.akamai.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00569 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:39:41 -0400 Received: (from dshaw@localhost) by claude.akamai.com (8.9.1/8.8.7) id TAA00964 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:39:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:39:40 -0500 From: David Shaw To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming Message-ID: <19990422193940.A916@jabberwocky.com> Mail-Followup-To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM References: <19990422110046.A1585@jabberwocky.com> <2504.924810593@monkeys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i In-Reply-To: <2504.924810593@monkeys.com>; from Ronald F. Guilmette on Thu, Apr 22, 1999 at 12:49:53PM -0700 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CB3B415/2048/4D 96 83 18 2B AF BE 45 D0 07 C4 07 51 37 B3 18 X-URL: http://www.jabberwocky.com/ X-Phase-Of-Moon: The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (53% of Full) X-Current-Email-Backlog: 229 X-Pointless-Random-Number: 192 X-Silly-Header: It sure is. X-Time-Til-Y2K: 36 weeks, 1 days, 4 hours, 40 minutes, 44 seconds Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, Apr 22, 1999 at 12:49:53PM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > > In message <19990422110046.A1585@jabberwocky.com>, > David Shaw wrote: > > >On Wed, Apr 21, 1999 at 09:42:36PM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > >> Nonetheless, all I have at this point is speculation. Nobody has yet > >> shown me one living breathing example of an SMTP sending agent that > >> will go berzerk or do Bad Things if it gets a 5xx error after the DATA > >> phase of the transaction. > > > >Alan Brown on rbl-discuss mentioned the AppleShare IP Mail Server 5.0. > >To quote: "One's currently belting on my main mailserver, to the tune of > >20,000 connects in the last 24 hours." I think it doesn't take 5xx for an > >answer... ^^^^^^^ > > Do you grasp the difference between speculation and definitive evidence? > > ``I think'' that you were actually the second gunman who was on the grassy > knoll on that crisp November day in 1963 back in Dallas. So should we > lock you up? > > >Now, I'll grant you there are a few more sendmail installations in the > >world than AppleShare, but it is a "living breathing example". > > No, it's speculation, and no even very substantial speculation. Ron, what part of "One's currently belting on my main mailserver, to the tune of 20,000 connects in the last 24 hours." is speculation? The "I think" is *my* comment. Notice the closing quotes right before it? You also edited what I said, distorting its meaning. The whole statement from the original mail was: "I think it doesn't take 5xx for an answer, period, rather than just after the DATA phase, but that is probably immaterial here." The salient point of that statement, which you edited out, was that I suspected that the server didn't accept 5xx at all. It is not an open question whether the server is performing correctly or not, as a correctly performing server wouldn't continue to connect 20,000 times a day. > >He also > >mentioned several (unnamed) mailing list systems that don't "take 5xx for > >an answer". > > He said that he _believed_ there may be some such. > > He didn't say that he actually knew of any. > > I believe that the Loch Ness monster exists... and I have video tapes > of it! Want you buy some? Only $39.95 a tape! Hey! Such a deal. > Send me your credit card number. Bzzzt. Wrong. Actual quote: "I've had to deal with the aftermath of several mailing list packages which wouldn't take 5xx for an answer" Thanks for playing though. Do whatever the heck you want on your OWN systems, but I think it is irresponsible of you to provide the patches to sendmail to implement this functionality without mentioning that it might have unwanted (at best) side effects. I'm sure you'll do whatever you want, as usual, though. > >but do you really trust every programmer who is working on mail systems to > >always get it right? > > No, but neither do I have a fallout shelter/bunker in my backyard. > > I don't make plans around unlikely possibilities and/or idle speculations > about really weird stuff that _may_ happen. > > Hell! The Sun might suddenly go nova! I guess I'd better rush down to > the local Thrify's and pick up some of that SPF 5,000 sun block! > :-) Ron, you have gotten so rabid on the subject of spam that even people who agree with you in spirit (like me) are turned off by your ranting. * You aren't always right. * Just because someone points out a potential flaw in your reasoning doesn't make them the devil. * Decaf is your friend. I'm done with this topic as, frankly, I'm starting to think you're trolling. It's verging off topic for list-managers anyway. David -- David Shaw | dshaw@jabberwocky.com | WWW http://www.jabberwocky.com/ +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence." - Jeremy S. Anderson From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 17:31:08 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA11607; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 17:17:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA11600 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 17:16:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA18905 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 17:20:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA10565 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 17:32:04 -0700 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: IMRSS notification considered NOT SPAM In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 21 Apr 1999 09:22:53 -0400. From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 17:32:04 -0700 Message-ID: <10563.924827524@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , "Tom Neff" wrote: >IMRSS open-relay notification is NOT spam because it is an Internet public >safety function. That is the only content based exemption that should be >recognized. They should go on about their work without worrying about being >hassled as spammers. IMRSS never gets hassled by spammers. It only gets hassled by people who think that have some sort of God-given right to run a public nuisance. If it was sending out ``open relay notifications'' then it would also get hassled by some people who call themselves virulent anti-spammers. Anyway, as I have noted, IMRSS doesn't need to send out notifications itself. Rather, we on the IMRSS Project are appealing to the community of Internet sysadmins at large to help us with this importanty task. If you are willing to help us with this important work, please see: http://www.imrss.org/using-notify.html -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 19:55:02 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id TAA13048; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:43:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id TAA13041 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:43:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA06392 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:47:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA15111 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:58:39 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:39:40 -0500. <19990422193940.A916@jabberwocky.com> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:58:39 -0700 Message-ID: <15109.924836319@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <19990422193940.A916@jabberwocky.com>, David Shaw wrote: >> No, it's speculation, and no even very substantial speculation. > >Ron, what part of "One's currently belting on my main mailserver, to the >tune of 20,000 connects in the last 24 hours." is speculation? That statement taken, alone, is NOT definitive proof that the sending SMTP agent fails to understand 5xx error responses. Ever heard of a mailbomb? OK, forget that. Ever hear of a 100,000 message spam run in which 20,000 or so end up going to AOL, or to Netcom, or to some other popular domain? 20,000 connections in a day doesn't prove anything about the protocol conformance level of the sending agent. You know it, I know it, and everybody here with a brain knows it. >The salient point of that statement, which you edited out, was that I >suspected that the server didn't accept 5xx at all. And like I said, I suspect that you were the second gunman on the grassy knoll. So what? Suspicion != evidence. >It is not an open >question whether the server is performing correctly or not, as a correctly >performing server wouldn't continue to connect 20,000 times a day. It might indeed do exactly that. See above. >> I believe that the Loch Ness monster exists... and I have video tapes >> of it! Want you buy some? Only $39.95 a tape! Hey! Such a deal. >> Send me your credit card number. > >Bzzzt. Wrong. Actual quote: > > "I've had to deal with the aftermath of several mailing list > packages which wouldn't take 5xx for an answer" Right, and then when pressed for the *names* of these alleged packages, he could not name any. And neither can you. Hey! This is the list-managers mailing list right? OK. Swell! HEY! Listen up y'all! You are all mailing list admins, yes? So have any of you ever used a mailing list packages that ignores 5xx SMTP error codes? (If *anybody* would know about such a thing, it would be the people here. Let's see if even a single one raises his/her hand.) >Do whatever the heck you want on your OWN systems, but I think it is >irresponsible of you to provide the patches to sendmail to implement this >functionality without mentioning that it might have unwanted (at best) >side effects. And I think it is irresponsible or _you_ to try to terrorize people into not wanting to help us with the important work of closing down open relays on the Internet, especially when you are doing it via totally unsubstantiated rumors and heresay. You seem to be DELIBERATELY creating Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD) rather than proven facts. Why? Are you opposed to having the net become a more secure and a less spam-friendly place? >> Hell! The Sun might suddenly go nova! I guess I'd better rush down to >> the local Thrify's and pick up some of that SPF 5,000 sun block! >> :-) > >Ron, you have gotten so rabid on the subject of spam that even people who >agree with you in spirit (like me) are turned off by your ranting. I'm rabid about the truth. Sorry you don't like it. I was trained in the hard sciences and I believe that people ought to make decisions based upon established facts rather than upon gossip and speculation. As somebody (Carl Sagan?) once said ``Religion requires faith without proof, and science requires proof without faith.'' >* You aren't always right. Fine. So prove me wrong. Post the product name and version number of the SMTP agent that has been (or that can be) _proven_ to ignore 5xx responses. I'm waiting. >* Just because someone points out a potential flaw in your reasoning > doesn't make them the devil. You aren't the devil. You are just like all of the people who believe in astrology and who buy the National Enquirer at the checkout stand so that they can read their horoscope for the day. You make decisions based upon flimsey things that people say, in lieu of hard evidence. >I'm done with this topic as, frankly, I'm starting to think you're >trolling. It's verging off topic for list-managers anyway. I ain't trolling. We still got about a bazillion open relays on the net and we need everybody's help to alert the owners of those systems to the dangers that they themselves are facing by running these things. Some people can (and do) help by just rejecting all incoming mail from the open relay servers that IMRSS has cataloged. Others are now helping by using the ``spoofed late failure hack'' I described. And then there's other folks who just want to scare people into doing nothing, and letting the problem fester. -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 23:08:18 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA15027; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 22:58:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id WAA15020 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 22:58:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197] (may be forged)) by plaidworks.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA26556 ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 23:03:42 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <19990422193940.A916@jabberwocky.com> References: <19990422110046.A1585@jabberwocky.com> <2504.924810593@monkeys.com> <19990422193940.A916@jabberwocky.com> Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 22:04:53 -0700 To: David Shaw , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 7:39 PM -0500 4/22/99, David Shaw wrote: > Ron, what part of "One's currently belting on my main mailserver, to the > tune of 20,000 connects in the last 24 hours." is speculation? The parts that don't match up to Ron's idea of reality. They don't match his idea of what sohuld be, so by definition they're speculation and can be ignored. Which they will be. -- Chuq Von Rospach (Hockey fan? ) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) + Featuring Winslow Leach at the Piano! From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 22 23:38:14 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA15018; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 22:58:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id WAA15011 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 22:58:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197] (may be forged)) by plaidworks.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA35506 ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 23:03:35 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 22:02:18 -0700 To: "Tom Neff" , From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: IMRSS notification considered NOT SPAM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 9:22 AM -0400 4/21/99, Tom Neff wrote: > IMRSS open-relay notification is NOT spam because it is an Internet public > safety function. Watch out, this is a slippery slope. If I decide it's a public safety function to start warning internet users that Jesus is coming and to repent before he arrives, then by your definition, what I'm doing isn't spam (after all, what is a few open relays compared to saving all of your souls?) Who bonks IMRSS on the head and says this is okay, but my soul-saver isn't? There IS no authority. So you're simply opening things up to abuse. If there is no authorizing body over "this is good/this is bad" (and there isn't), authorities live or die based on self-authorization and the acceptance of the user base. And you better be very, very careful how you define things, lest you set precedents that you'll regret later. -- Chuq Von Rospach (Hockey fan? ) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) + Featuring Winslow Leach at the Piano! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 04:10:19 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id DAA21309; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 03:58:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pneuma.freshwind.com (pneuma.freshwind.com [207.40.103.25]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id DAA21300 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 03:58:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (benji@localhost) by pneuma.freshwind.com (8.9.3-benji/benjimail) with SMTP id FAA28261; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 05:51:42 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: pneuma.freshwind.com: benji owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 05:51:42 -0500 (CDT) From: "Jenni \"Benji\" Baier" X-Sender: benji@pneuma.freshwind.com To: "Nathan J. Mehl" cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Another Iname/anonymous mail aliasing problem In-Reply-To: <19990421204900.K3829@blank.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I'm the admin of a good sized technical mailing list (running majordomo and qmail). From time to time, we're the victim of pranks and attacks and other general nastiness. At the moment, I'm dealing with a relatively "mild" anonymous alias issue, but a frustrating one none the less: Someone set up an iname/mail.com account and has it forwarded to the list address. This acct has been subscribed to many commercial mailing lists as well... I'm not sure if this was intentional or if it was just a co-incidence (its the kind of address that some people might use as a "dummy" address if don't really want to disclose their email but the feild is required.) Since the list only posts messages from subscribers, these junkmails don't get distributed, but they do bounce and create errors. I've also had situations in the past where someone will register a mail alias, subscribe it to the list, then redirect the alias to the list address. Even tho this rarely succeeds in creating a loop, it generally makes life unpleasant and bogs down the server till the errors are sorted out. Since iname/mail.com won't just send the password to the email address in question (you must also answer questions that the person who set it up would know, birthdate, etc), there's little that can be done on the list server's side to correct the problem. Filters can be put in place to prevent iname relays from passing mail to the list address, but that's just a bandaid. I called the customer service number and left a voicemail... we'll see what happens. While it is true that aliasing issues would exist regardless of the free/anonymous services, these third party alias providers make the task of tracking down abusers that much more difficult. Privacy issues prevent the alias providers from disclosing useful information, and while they may be responsive as far as shutting down an account, that is of little consolation when the offending party can simply register yet another alias and start over. I would like to see the alias provider to pass my complaint on to the offender's ISP (whomever is responsible for the IP address that the offender was using when he registered and/or made changes to the alias account), but I somehow doubt that will happen. The other other list admins and I (as well as the network admins for the network that hosts the box that the list server runs on) have discussed banning known anonymous mail relays and other problem sites from subscribing to the list, for this and other reasons. I'm already the admin for other lists that have had a more restrictive subscription policy for a long time... often they require a questionnaire be completed before they can subscribe. It may be inconvenient, but it seems to help. Anyone have any thoughts about this? --jenni baier From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 04:31:24 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id EAA21501; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 04:16:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gsp.org (rsk.itw.com [208.211.3.21]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id EAA21494 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 04:16:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsk@localhost) by gsp.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA24729; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 06:56:15 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 06:56:15 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: Tom Neff Subject: Re: IMRSS notification considered NOT SPAM Message-ID: <19990423065615.A24725@gsp.org> References: <199904210800.BAA07265@honor.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: ; from Tom Neff on Wed, Apr 21, 1999 at 09:22:53AM -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, Apr 21, 1999 at 09:22:53AM -0400, Tom Neff wrote: > IMRSS open-relay notification is NOT spam because it is an Internet public > safety function. That is the only content based exemption that should > be recognized. Wrong. There are no exceptions, and there cannot be exceptions because doing so would require changing the definition of UBE from one that is content-neutral (and therefore defensible in a number of senses, including the legal one) to one that is content-sensitive. If you do not understand why that is completely unacceptable, then I strongly suggest that you subscribe to the mailing list designated for spam discussion (spam-l via peach.ease.lsoft.com) and read the ongoing traffic about a UK charity's (now-abandoned) plans to spam and the ensuing reaction. ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk@gsp.org From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 06:02:21 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id FAA22553; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 05:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from socrates.uophx.edu (socrates.uophx.edu [204.17.17.98]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id FAA22540; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 05:45:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (sgmiller@localhost) by socrates.uophx.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA16069; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 05:53:13 -0700 Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 05:53:12 -0700 (MST) From: "Steven G. Miller" To: List-Managers , Majordomo-Users Subject: Thanks Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Thanks for all the responses for the noadvertise line! Steve From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 11:03:29 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA26148; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 10:58:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Kitten.mcs.com (Kitten.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id KAA26139 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 10:58:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Jupiter.mcs.net (dattier@Jupiter.mcs.net [192.160.127.88]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.7/8.8.2) with ESMTP id MAA13288 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:59:00 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by Jupiter.mcs.net (8.8.7/8.8.2) id MAA21852 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:59:00 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <199904231759.MAA21852@Jupiter.mcs.net> Subject: Re: Should iname.com be blacklisted? / VERP power To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:58:59 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: <19990421204900.K3829@blank.org> from "Nathan J. Mehl" at Apr 21, 99 08:49:00 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk When Thomas Gramstad wrote, G> The subscriber's account at ISP 2 is closed, and address 2 G> produces error messages to the list manager. No clue to address 1 G> can be easily identified, but ISP 1 can be identified from the G> headers or contents of the error message. Nathan Mehl responded, M> This has been a general problem for list managers (myself included) M> since the first mailing list was created. Several mailing list M> managers include features to help deal with it, and two MTAs (qmail M> and postfix) implement Variable Envelope Response Paths to solve M> the problem permanently. VERPs are wonderful -- they take care of sites like Prodigy for example. (I had a subscriber forwarding to a nonexistent address on Prodigy. Prodigy returned only the information that there was no such mailbox on Prodigy as that account number: Received: headers, no Subject:, and no text from the original undelivered message. The concept that you don't recognize the Prodigy account number because you wrote to someone who forwarded the message to Prodigy escaped them and likely still does. If I'd had a VERP facility available, that would have solved the problem. What I had to do instead, sheesh.) However, they don't help for subscriptions delivered to sites that don't recognize envelope sender addresses and send NDNs to the From: or Reply-To: or Sender: address. So VERPs go a long way but it's a great exaggeration to claim that they "solve the problem permanently." M> I have located the account causing you the problem and de-activated M> it. You should see a more indicative bounce message shortly. Good. Bigfoot manages to send a bounce that says which Bigfoot username pointed to the undeliverable downstream address by including a "for" phrase in the Received: headers even when the item was blind-carboned to more than one Bigfoot address (at least in my tests). Surely iName can do something similar. From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 12:02:43 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA26804; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 11:51:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id LAA26797 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 11:51:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA17492 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 11:54:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA08977 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:06:32 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 22 Apr 1999 22:04:53 -0700. From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:06:32 -0700 Message-ID: <8975.924894392@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >At 7:39 PM -0500 4/22/99, David Shaw wrote: > >> Ron, what part of "One's currently belting on my main mailserver, to the >> tune of 20,000 connects in the last 24 hours." is speculation? > >The parts that don't match up to Ron's idea of reality. They don't >match his idea of what sohuld be, so by definition they're >speculation and can be ignored. Which they will be. I guess I need to say this again. If and when you (or anybody else) ever finds either (a) an SMTP sending agent that ignores 5xx error responses or else (b) the Loch Ness monster, I would appreciate being informed. -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 12:19:22 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA26975; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:04:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA26968 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:03:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA18956 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:07:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA09249 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:19:19 -0700 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: IMRSS notification considered NOT SPAM In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 22 Apr 1999 22:02:18 -0700. From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:19:19 -0700 Message-ID: <9247.924895159@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >At 9:22 AM -0400 4/21/99, Tom Neff wrote: >> IMRSS open-relay notification is NOT spam because it is an Internet public >> safety function. > >Watch out, this is a slippery slope. If I decide it's a public safety >function to start warning internet users that Jesus is coming and to >repent before he arrives, then by your definition, what I'm doing >isn't spam (after all, what is a few open relays compared to saving >all of your souls?) It causes me some considerable discomfort to say this, but for once, at least, it appears that Chuq and I are actually in agreement on something. Over time, I have gotten plenty of responses from various spammers saying something like ``No, but OUR message wasn't spam, because {... bogus excuse # 75201 ...}'' Hell! It's gotten to the point now where they put these bogus disclaimers IN THE SPAM... ``This message isn't spam because we aren't trying to sell you anything.'' (Instead, they are trying to get you to visit their web site where they will either (a) try to sell you something or else (b) earn some money just on the basis of having attracted your eyeballs.) It is indeed a slipery slope. If IMRSS can do it, then the International Red Cross can do it. And if they can do it, then the ``Make a Wish Foundation'' can do it on behalf of dying children. And if they can do it, then United Way can do it, and THEN there will be no end to it. -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 12:34:33 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA27065; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:15:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.235.116.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA27049 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:14:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tpad.squawk.com (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA30406 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 15:15:51 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990423134827.034e4d50@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 13:48:27 -0400 To: From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: IMRSS notification considered NOT SPAM In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 10:02 PM 4/22/99 -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >At 9:22 AM -0400 4/21/99, Tom Neff wrote: >> IMRSS open-relay notification is NOT spam because it is an Internet public >> safety function. > >Watch out, this is a slippery slope. If I decide it's a public safety >function to start warning internet users that Jesus is coming and to >repent before he arrives, then by your definition, what I'm doing >isn't spam (after all, what is a few open relays compared to saving >all of your souls?) Gotta agree with Chuq here. This is essentially the same justification that topica.com used for their content based spamming. I believe that, in the dim dark past, someone did run a scan and notify postmasters of open relays. I don't think that IMRSS is doing this and if they were, I'd call it spam. -- Do I believe in the bible? Hell, man! I've seen one! Nick Simicich mailto:njs@scifi.squawk.com or (last choice) mailto:njs@us.ibm.com http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html -- Stop by and Light Up The World! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 12:49:12 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA27283; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:38:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA27276 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:37:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA21515; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:41:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA10281; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:53:25 -0700 To: "Jenni \"Benji\" Baier" cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Another Iname/anonymous mail aliasing problem In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 23 Apr 1999 05:51:42 -0500. From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:53:24 -0700 Message-ID: <10279.924897204@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , "Jenni \"Benji\" Baier" wrote: >The other other list admins and I (as well as the network admins for the >network that hosts the box that the list server runs on) have discussed >banning known anonymous mail relays and other problem sites from >subscribing to the list, for this and other reasons. I'm already the >admin for other lists that have had a more restrictive subscription policy >for a long time... often they require a questionnaire be completed before >they can subscribe. It may be inconvenient, but it seems to help. Anyone >have any thoughts about this? What you are really talking about is forwarding services. Note that essentially any UNIX-based MTAs has the capability of doing mail forwarding (but you probably don't want to block mail from all UNIX systems). The problem isn't all forwarding services, but just the ``free'' forwarding services, including (but not limited to): bigfoot.com mail.com/iname.com/globecomm.com netaddress.usa.net netforward.com ... There are several others. It seems that it is only the free forwarding services that net-miscreants are inclined to use to cause grief for others. An account on any one of these can be (and on occasion have been) setup, subscribed to a couple of bazillion mailing lists, and then, once the fire hose is up to full speed, it can be redirected at someone else's account... presumably someone whom the account creator does not like. This exact thing already happend to one account here via a free usa.net forwarding account. If I were a list admin, I would refuse subscriptions for any address in any one of these domains, but that's just my opinion. -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 13:46:26 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA28007; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 13:42:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu (BROCCOLI.GRAPHICS.CORNELL.EDU [128.84.247.53]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id NAA28000 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 13:42:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from graphics.cornell.edu (localhost.graphics.cornell.edu) by broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu with ESMTP (1.37.109.16/16.2) id AA055740199; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 16:43:19 -0400 Message-Id: <199904232043.AA055740199@broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97 To: Nick Simicich Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: IMRSS notification considered NOT SPAM In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 23 Apr 1999 13:48:27 EDT." <3.0.5.32.19990423134827.034e4d50@127.0.0.1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 16:43:18 -0400 From: Mitch Collinsworth Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >I believe that, in the dim dark past, someone did run a scan and notify >postmasters of open relays. I don't think that IMRSS is doing this and if >they were, I'd call it spam. Dim dark past? ORBS was doing it just last week. Oddly enough one of their stock messages says they don't scan netblocks. But as everyone knows, spammers have a slippery grasp of "truth". -Mitch From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 14:46:34 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA28604; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 14:30:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu (BROCCOLI.GRAPHICS.CORNELL.EDU [128.84.247.53]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id OAA28590 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 14:30:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from graphics.cornell.edu (localhost.graphics.cornell.edu) by broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu with ESMTP (1.37.109.16/16.2) id AA057723081; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 17:31:21 -0400 Message-Id: <199904232131.AA057723081@broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97 To: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 22 Apr 1999 01:39:07 PDT." <17354.924770347@monkeys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 17:31:20 -0400 From: Mitch Collinsworth Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >The Goal of the IMRSS Project is to construct a large list of exactly such >IP addresses. And all this time I thought the goal was to construct a _small_ list, by convincing people to get their systems _off_ the list. -Mitch From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 15:15:26 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA29003; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 15:10:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA28993 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 15:09:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from solva.ifi.uio.no (1368@solva.ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.20]) by ifi.uio.no (8.8.8/8.8.7/ifi0.2) with SMTP id AAA20145; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 00:10:47 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from thomasg@localhost) by solva.ifi.uio.no ; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 00:10:46 +0200 Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 00:10:44 +0200 From: Thomas Gramstad Reply-To: thomasg@ifi.uio.no To: "Nathan J. Mehl" Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Should iname.com be blacklisted? In-Reply-To: "Nathan J. Mehl" 's message of Wed, 21 Apr 1999 20:49:00 -0400 References: <19990421204900.K3829@blank.org> Message-ID: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Nathan J. Mehl wrote: > Okay, massive disclaimer here. I work for Mail.Com, formerly iName. > I could, in fact, be called its postmaster. [...] > I believe that you have simply been unlucky in the amount of > time it took to have the problem fixed. There are over five > million iName users -- we are not a small company and it is > possible for it to take some time to respond to requests. We > generally meet a 5-hour turnaround on most customer-service > issues -- you have my apologies on our behalf that this took > so much longer. > > I have located the account causing you the problem and de-activated > it. You should see a more indicative bounce message shortly. Tnanks. I appreciate that. > And that's it for the company. From here on down, I'm speaking > for myself: > In the immortal words of Thomas Gramstad (thomasg@ifi.uio.no): >> >> 2. The subscriber's account at ISP 2 is closed, and address 2 >> produces error messages to the list manager. No clue to address 1 >> can be easily identified, but ISP 1 can be identified from the >> headers or contents of the error message. > This has been a general problem for list managers (myself included) > since the first mailing list was created. Yes, of course, it is a standard, oft-repeated problem. Therefore, one expects routines to be in place for handling it. And therefore, one is justified to expect a quick response. > Several mailing list managers include features to help deal with > it, and two MTAs (qmail and postfix) implement Variable Envelope > Response Paths to solve the problem permanently. I'm not in a position to decide what MTA my university is using. But I know that they are thinking seriously about switching from sendmail to exim. >> I have received no answer to my request, copyed below. Meanwhile, >> I continue to receive error messages. Since it is your (now >> defunct) user that is causing these error messages, it is your >> responsibility to help stop these error messages by providing >> the information that I asked for. I will not spend any more time >> writing more requests to you. Instead, I will simply forward all >> error messages I receive to you, until I get the infomation I need >> to stop them. This message, therefore, is a notification to you >> that you will receive such error messages, until that time. > While I sympathize with your frustration in not getting an > immediate response, I think its safe to say that threats of > annoyance/harassment are IN GENERAL a good way to get one's > request -- however otherwise reasonable -- taken less seriously. First: Returning error messages to a non-responsive ISP who is generating them cannot, by any reasonable definition of the term, be called "harassment". Secondly, as to "annoyance", my experience contradicts your claim. In the lack of responsiveness to polite requests, my experience is that making a lot of noise and being an annoyance will get the job done. The meek do not inherit the earth. Repeated polite requests do not work if the first two polite requests do not work. In such cases, being a pain works, because then they will want you off their back. That's just how the world works. >> At the very least I think that this behavior, or non-behavior as >> the case may be, qualifies for blacklisting. > Honestly, this is silly. The forwarding problem has existed > since long before iName or any other free email service, and > going five days without hearing a response to a postmaster mail, > while aggravating, is hardly in itself reason to do anything > more drastic than, say, block out a domain locally. Well, I don't honestly know if blacklisting is warranted, what I do know is that suggesting it solved my problem. As I said, standard problems should be handled routinely and in a timely fashion -- that is a reasonable expectation. But since my posting, several other people have come forward with the exact same experience and complaint as I did, about iname/Mail.com. Including one sent to me personally that I will anonymize and append below. In other words, this doesn't look like a one-time accident, it looks like a pattern of negligence. If that really is the case, I would say that blacklisting might be an appropriate response. Thomas Gramstad thomasg@ifi.uio.no ----------------------------------- And here is the anonymized response: ---begin > I had the exact same situation as a new mailing list owner. It > went on for months until I finally had to break my list down > into smaller lists of 15 or so addresses and mail them > individually until I finally found the "offending address". > > I developed a template, stating exactly why they were receiving > the "probe", and explaining iName was unresponsive in assisting > me in any way. I also stated in my template that the > possibility existed that they might receive more than one of > these probes. Fortunately, I found the culprit before I had to > send out very many duplicates. > > The way I went about it was to send myself the template with 15 > of my member's addresses in the BCC field (I weeded out all > addresses I KNEW were not the culprit first). Then I waited to > see if I got the bounce. When I did not get the bounce after the > first set, then I tried the second set of 15 addresses the next > day. I got the bounce on the third day, and resent the template > to the first 5 addresses in the third set of 15. I believe I > found the bad address on the second set of five, so thankfully > not too many had to suffer the duplicates. > > I was very lucky in that this bad address was in my digest > version, which had only about 350 members. I figured it would > take about 20 days to go through the entire list. If your list > is very large, this particular method will probably not be > feasible, but for me, it was the only thing I could come up > with. > > I had also written several letters to iName, without ever > receiving a reply at all. I searched their website and wrote to > every address I could find...only got an autoresponse. I wanted > soooo badly to ban their domain from subscriber list, but with > all those different vanity addresses, I found it would be more > trouble than I wanted to go through. > > As a side note, I did not receive any complaints about the > "probe". Guess folks understand more than we think sometimes. ---end From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 16:33:14 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA29684; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 16:18:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id QAA29674 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 16:18:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA25233 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 16:22:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA16458 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 16:33:59 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 23 Apr 1999 17:31:20 -0400. <199904232131.AA057723081@broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 16:33:58 -0700 Message-ID: <16456.924910438@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <199904232131.AA057723081@broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu>, Mitch Collinsworth wrote: >>The Goal of the IMRSS Project is to construct a large list of exactly such >>IP addresses. > >And all this time I thought the goal was to construct a _small_ list, >by convincing people to get their systems _off_ the list. Well, that is a desirable side effect, but an unfortunate number of people are still operating under the delusion that there is some advantage to running mail servers as open relays that can be hijacked massively by spammers. Over time, the size of that set is declining however, as more and more have their servers crashed by spammers and/or have to deal with a sudden massive influx of hate mail in the wake of a spmming/hijacking event. -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 17:30:09 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA00448; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 17:21:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.vnet.net (smtp2.vnet.net [166.82.1.32]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA00441 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 17:21:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lmd.vnet.net (lmd.vnet.net [166.82.1.41]) by smtp2.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA15501 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 20:24:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by lmd.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA23513 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 20:22:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA29188 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 20:22:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 20:22:46 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming In-Reply-To: <199904232131.AA057723081@broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk This thread has gone far from the topic of list management. Perhaps it could be moved to a more appropriate forum. - murr - From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 17:45:07 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA00398; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 17:16:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from venus.communitech.net (venus.communitech.net [209.15.2.6]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id RAA00390 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 17:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thorby ([204.210.106.57]) by venus.communitech.net ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 19:13:27 -600 Message-Id: <4.1.19990423135602.00b7a240@mail.rudbek.com> X-Sender: vawjr@mail.rudbek.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 14:17:18 -1000 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: "Victor A. Wagner, Jr." Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming In-Reply-To: <8975.924894392@monkeys.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At Friday 4/23/99 12:06, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > [deleted] > >If and when you (or anybody else) ever finds either (a) an SMTP sending >agent that ignores 5xx error responses or else (b) the Loch Ness monster, >I would appreciate being informed. b) http://www.lochness.co.uk/ http://www.strangemag.com/nessie.home.html http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/home/scotland/monster.html more references available upon request Victor A. Wagner, Jr. PGP RSA fingerprint = 4D20 EBF6 0101 B069 3817 8DBF C846 E47A PGP D-H fingerprint = 98BC 65E3 1A19 43EC 3908 65B9 F755 E6F4 63BB 9D93 The five most dangerous words in the English language: "There oughta be a law" From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 18:15:10 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA00847; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:02:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA00832 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:02:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197] (may be forged)) by plaidworks.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA20884 ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:08:15 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <9247.924895159@monkeys.com> References: <9247.924895159@monkeys.com> Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 17:56:22 -0700 To: "Ronald F. Guilmette" , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: IMRSS notification considered NOT SPAM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:19 PM -0700 4/23/99, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > It causes me some considerable discomfort to say this, but for once, at > least, it appears that Chuq and I are actually in agreement on something. Excuse me, but I'm going off to re-examine my position. chuq (grin) -- Chuq Von Rospach (Hockey fan? ) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) + Featuring Winslow Leach at the Piano! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 18:30:16 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA01036; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:24:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA01019 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:23:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197] (may be forged)) by plaidworks.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA20984 ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:29:30 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <8975.924894392@monkeys.com> References: <8975.924894392@monkeys.com> Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:07:37 -0700 To: "Ronald F. Guilmette" , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:06 PM -0700 4/23/99, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > I guess I need to say this again. > > If and when you (or anybody else) ever finds either Nah. You'll just find some other rationale to ignore us. If and when Ronald ever listens to anyone but his own counsel, the sun will immediately go nova. -- Chuq Von Rospach (Hockey fan? ) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) + Featuring Winslow Leach at the Piano! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 18:45:10 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA00848; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:02:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA00835 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:02:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197] (may be forged)) by plaidworks.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA21086 ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:08:13 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <10279.924897204@monkeys.com> References: <10279.924897204@monkeys.com> Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 17:55:42 -0700 To: "Ronald F. Guilmette" , "Jenni \"Benji\" Baier" From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: Another Iname/anonymous mail aliasing problem Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:53 PM -0700 4/23/99, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > > The problem isn't all forwarding services, but just the ``free'' forwarding > services, including (but not limited to): > netaddress.usa.net Formerly free. They're instituting charges for some of their services, including forwarding. It's been creating large amounts of admin traffic on my sites as all of the rats abandon their old ship for some new ship. > If I were a list admin, I would refuse subscriptions for any address in > any one of these domains, but that's just my opinion. If you were a list admin, you'd... oh, never mind. I won't go there. but thanks for reminding us you don't actually DO this stuff, Ronald. You just wander through this list telling those of us who do that we don't know how to do it right. -- Chuq Von Rospach (Hockey fan? ) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) + Featuring Winslow Leach at the Piano! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 19:00:20 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA01033; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:24:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA01020 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:23:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197] (may be forged)) by plaidworks.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA20972 ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:29:25 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19990423134827.034e4d50@127.0.0.1> References: <3.0.5.32.19990423134827.034e4d50@127.0.0.1> Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:05:58 -0700 To: Nick Simicich , From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: IMRSS notification considered NOT SPAM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 1:48 PM -0400 4/23/99, Nick Simicich wrote: > I believe that, in the dim dark past, someone did run a scan and notify > postmasters of open relays. dorkslayer was one. He was finally shut down by his ISP after refusing to modify his procedures (mostly because he put the blocks in place first and notified later, if I remember correctly. His ISP wanted him to send out warnings and if it wasn't fixed after some period of time, then add the block. he refused) . Last I heard, it was still shut down. He actually nailed one of my sites, which caused me three days of craziness tracking down the relay and fixing it (turned out to be a weird sendmail config thingie... he was right, which caused me no end of irritation given my position on spam and stuff...). It also point out just how few sites actually subscribed to his blocking service. It only impacted two sites with subscribers on it. -- Chuq Von Rospach (Hockey fan? ) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) + Featuring Winslow Leach at the Piano! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 19:15:10 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA01043; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:24:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA01035 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:24:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197] (may be forged)) by plaidworks.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA21268 ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:29:35 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199904231759.MAA21852@Jupiter.mcs.net> References: <199904231759.MAA21852@Jupiter.mcs.net> Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:24:34 -0700 To: "David W. Tamkin" , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: Should iname.com be blacklisted? / VERP power Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:58 PM -0500 4/23/99, David W. Tamkin wrote: > If I'd had a VERP facility > available, that would have solved the problem. What I had to do instead, > sheesh.) You know what I do? I try to research bounces, and if I find I can't resolve them, I throw them out. I have a procmail script that pre-filters my bounce mail, and if it finds incoming bounces that have addresses that match a list of addresses I've already checked, it /dev/nulls them. I figure if a site isn't willing to give me good information to fix the bounces, it can just live with the overhead of the bounces until I get around to doing an address probe. When I do an address probe with encoded messages, I clean out all of the bounces that finds, zero out me "can't find" address list and start over. So that stuff doesn't waste my time or energy. I never see it once I decide I can't find it. And that seems like a lot less hassle than anything that'd cause someone like David to go "sheesh" over -- after all, if those sites don't want to be cooperative, I don't see any need to go out of my way to fix the bounces. If they wanted them fixed, they'd make it possible. I'll spend my time taking care of the bounces from sites that DO, in fact, make it possible to fix, and not worry about the rest. -- Chuq Von Rospach (Hockey fan? ) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) + Featuring Winslow Leach at the Piano! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 21:16:22 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA02842; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 21:13:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id VAA02835 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 21:13:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA25942 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 21:16:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA24410 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 21:28:36 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Another Iname/anonymous mail aliasing problem In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 23 Apr 1999 17:55:42 -0700. From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 21:28:35 -0700 Message-ID: <24408.924928115@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >> If I were a list admin, I would refuse subscriptions for any address in >> any one of these domains, but that's just my opinion. > >If you were a list admin, you'd... oh, never mind. I won't go there. >but thanks for reminding us you don't actually DO this stuff, Ronald. >You just wander through this list telling those of us who do that we >don't know how to do it right. Absolutely correct. I came here, originally, because about 100 or so of your fellow list admins had participated in nearly crashing my server and in throughly disrupting my business for more than 3 days via their willingness to accept without question (and without confirmation) forged subscriptions for a couple of my critical business E-mail addresses. Following that incident, I arrived here to extol the virtues of subscription confir- mations to any and all here who would listen. That job being essentially completed, I stay now mostly just for the privlege of being verbally abused by you. -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 22:01:23 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA03208; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 21:56:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id VAA03201 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 21:56:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA01986 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 22:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA25566 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 22:12:10 -0700 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: IMRSS notification considered NOT SPAM In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:05:58 -0700. From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 22:12:09 -0700 Message-ID: <25564.924930729@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >At 1:48 PM -0400 4/23/99, Nick Simicich wrote: > >> I believe that, in the dim dark past, someone did run a scan and notify >> postmasters of open relays. > >dorkslayer was one. He was finally shut down by his ISP after >refusing to modify his procedures (mostly because he put the blocks >in place first and notified later, if I remember correctly. His ISP >wanted him to send out warnings and if it wasn't fixed after some >period of time, then add the block. he refused). No, actually, he complied 100%. But thwt wasn't enough to stop all complaints from going to his pro- vider, so demonstrating a distinct and utter lack of backcome, BCTel finally told him (Alan Hodgson) to vacate his IP addresses (which he subsequently did). >Last I heard, it was still shut down. The dorkslayers domain name and its associated open relays DNS zone is in the process of being brought back to life.... by the IMRSS project. (We own the domain name now.) >He actually nailed one of my sites, which caused >me three days of craziness tracking down the relay and fixing it >(turned out to be a weird sendmail config thingie... he was right, >which caused me no end of irritation given my position on spam and >stuff...). > >It also point out just how few sites actually subscribed to his >blocking service. It only impacted two sites with subscribers on it. A lot of sites can't use these kinds of systems if it means potentially rejecting some valid non-spam mail. But I solved that problem. You can now have your cake and eat it too: http://www.imrss.org/using-notify.html I am running with this myself here now. Great fun! -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 24 01:53:34 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id BAA06068; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 01:39:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dns.cyberlink.ch (dns.cyberlink.ch [193.246.253.10]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id BAA06060 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 01:39:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from quill.thinkcoach.com (vpop-100.cyberlink.ch [212.55.211.100]) by dns.cyberlink.ch (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA02815 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 10:40:37 +0200 Received: (from norbert@localhost) by quill.thinkcoach.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA13811; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 09:28:57 +0200 Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 09:28:57 +0200 Message-Id: <199904240728.JAA13811@quill.thinkcoach.com> From: Norbert Bollow Prefer-Language: de, en, fr To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-reply-to: <19990421194947.A1437@jabberwocky.com> (message from David Shaw on Wed, 21 Apr 1999 19:49:49 -0500) Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming References: <24633.924649198@monkeys.com> <199904211948.OAA88081@Mercury.mcs.net> <19990421194947.A1437@jabberwocky.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk David Shaw > I suspect that most users *aren't* aware they are using an open relay. I > imagine it would be more of a warning to the unknowing user that their ISP > was misconfigured and therefore their mail would be rejected at a number > of sites. Are there other sites besides AOL who silently discard mail which trips their spam filters without any kind of alert to either the sender or the intended recipient of the message? (Seems a very dumb policy to me.) May blessings from the eternal God surprise and overtake you! Norbert. -- Norbert Bollow, Zuerich, Switzerland. Backup e-mail address: NB@POBOX.COM I'm a coach who assists people in developing their personal networks and reaching their life goals. Please visit my homepage: http://thinkcoach.com From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 24 03:47:35 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id DAA09047; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 03:43:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.235.116.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id DAA09040 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 03:43:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tpad.squawk.com (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA02642; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 06:44:39 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990423230721.0366d4c0@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 23:07:21 -0400 To: "David W. Tamkin" From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: Should iname.com be blacklisted? / VERP power Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199904231759.MAA21852@Jupiter.mcs.net> References: <19990421204900.K3829@blank.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:58 PM 4/23/99 -0500, David W. Tamkin wrote: >Good. Bigfoot manages to send a bounce that says which Bigfoot username >pointed to the undeliverable downstream address by including a "for" phrase >in the Received: headers even when the item was blind-carboned to more than >one Bigfoot address (at least in my tests). Surely iName can do something >similar. This is a really bad idea, unless this is produced as part of a bigfoot internal expansion after they are internally directing the mail to only one recipient. Is that more or less what you are saying? Can one bigfoot customer see that another bigfoot customer was BCC'd? -- That which does not kill us, makes us stronger. That which does kill us makes us smell stronger, after a few days, anyway. Nick Simicich mailto:njs@scifi.squawk.com or (last choice) mailto:njs@us.ibm.com http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html -- Stop by and Light Up The World! From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 24 11:16:40 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA12967; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 10:51:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id KAA12960 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 10:51:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA09376 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 10:55:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA14204 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 11:07:32 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 24 Apr 1999 09:28:57 +0200. <199904240728.JAA13811@quill.thinkcoach.com> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 11:07:31 -0700 Message-ID: <14202.924977251@monkeys.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <199904240728.JAA13811@quill.thinkcoach.com>, Norbert Bollow wrote: >David Shaw > >> I suspect that most users *aren't* aware they are using an open relay. I >> imagine it would be more of a warning to the unknowing user that their ISP >> was misconfigured and therefore their mail would be rejected at a number >> of sites. > >Are there other sites besides AOL who silently discard mail which >trips their spam filters without any kind of alert to either the >sender or the intended recipient of the message? > >(Seems a very dumb policy to me.) Yes and no. Consider this: Their mail _reception_ machines are NOT the ones that make the spam/non-spam determination. The ones that do that are further into the pipeline. Be- cause of this, they are not able to simply reject the message via SMTP error codes as the message arrives, but would instead need to accept the entire message bodies and _then_ bounce them. Relevant RFCs require bounces to go to the envelope sender address. For big spam runs, the envelope sender address is often forged. It is thus either undeliverable or else is the address of some hapless innocent victim. I am not associated with AOL in any way, and do not speak for them, however it is my understanding that they do not bounce messages that they determine to be spam at the present time because: 1) Their current mail processing systems (the ones that _do_ make the spam/non-spam determination) are already straining under the current mail load and would be brought to their knees if they were also program to perform/attempt bouncing of messages that AOL has determined are spam. (AOL gets a LOT of spam. They are the biggest target on the planet.) I should also say that it is my understanding that their mail systems are already scheduled for replacement (i.e. with system having greater horsepower). 2) One one past occasion, at least, they were sued when they bounced a large amount of spam back to the originating network(s)/server(s). (The volume of bounced messages was apparently sufficient to crash the servers involved, which made their owners rather unhappy.) Regardless of these points, I personally do agree that their non-bouncing of messages they choose not to deliver is rather entirely suboptimal. But I guess that I can forgive them for it, because I understand their motiva- tion and rationale. -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc. -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/ -- FREE Web Harvester Protection - http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/ - Try it! -- FREE DynamicIP Spam Filtering - http://www.imrss.org/dssl/ - TELL YOUR ISP! From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 24 13:46:52 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA14580; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 13:17:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Kitten.mcs.com (Kitten.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id NAA14573 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 13:16:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Venus.mcs.net (dattier@Venus.mcs.net [192.160.127.92]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.7/8.8.2) with ESMTP id PAA12448 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:18:09 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by Venus.mcs.net (8.8.7/8.8.2) id PAA53827 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:18:09 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <199904242018.PAA53827@Venus.mcs.net> Subject: Re: VERP power To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:18:08 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: from "Chuq Von Rospach" at Apr 23, 99 06:24:34 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chuq Von Rospach wrote, | I figure if a site isn't willing to give me good information to fix | the bounces, it can just live with the overhead of the bounces until | I get around to doing an address probe. A list manager paying for his or her own bandwidth has that option. My list is hosted by the gracious hospitality of a member, and when I send out mail that won't be delivered and then have to receive an NDN for it, it's her money that I'm spending, so I haven't the degree of latitude that Chuq does when he spends his own. From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 24 14:01:45 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA14659; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 13:27:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Kitten.mcs.com (Kitten.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id NAA14652 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 13:27:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Venus.mcs.net (dattier@Venus.mcs.net [192.160.127.92]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.7/8.8.2) with ESMTP id PAA12675 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:28:36 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by Venus.mcs.net (8.8.7/8.8.2) id PAA54136 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:28:36 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <199904242028.PAA54136@Venus.mcs.net> Subject: Re: VERP Power Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:28:35 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19990423230721.0366d4c0@127.0.0.1> from "Nick Simicich" at Apr 23, 99 11:07:21 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk When I said, T> Good. Bigfoot manages to send a bounce that says which Bigfoot username T> pointed to the undeliverable downstream address by including a "for" phrase T> in the Received: headers even when the item was blind-carboned to more than T> one Bigfoot address (at least in my tests). Surely iName can do something T> similar. Nick Simicich replied, S> This is a really bad idea, unless this is produced as part of a bigfoot S> internal expansion after they are internally directing the mail to only one S> recipient. Is that more or less what you are saying? The "unless" clause is exactly what I'm saying, because it's what I believe. Here is what I did: I set my Bigfoot address to spread to two valid addreses of mine plus an invalid one. I sent mail from yet another address of mine to yet ANOTHER address of mine, blind-carboned to my Bigfoot address and also blind-carboned to a friend's Bigfoot address. It was delivered to the To: address, to the two valid forwarding points of my Bigfoot account, and to my friend; it was also bounced back to me. While the invalid address was given as the one with the delivery problems, the returned Received: headers below it had a "for" phrase that named only my Bigfoot address, not my friend's and not the final false address (nor either of the other two addresses to which my Bigfoot address was forwarding). S> Can one bigfoot customer see that another bigfoot customer was BCC'd? It appears not. From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 25 15:37:16 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA00878; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 13:39:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id NAA00868 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 13:39:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from triceratops.com (triceratops.com [206.83.162.235]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id WAA14747 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 22:27:49 -0700 (PDT) From: johnjohn@triceratops.com Received: (qmail 24904 invoked by uid 100); 23 Apr 1999 05:25:36 -0000 Message-ID: <19990422222536.C21656@triceratops.com> Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 22:25:36 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Best List Management Quote Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I always thought it happened to other people, not me. But sure enough, the following was sent to me tonight: ------------------------- and by the way, I'm not playing any "insulted innocent" game! I just was trying explain that I never started any of that crap with anyone, I only threw it back at them. is that trying to act like "insulted innocent"? ------------------------- What does one say to that? "You, sir, are the poster-child of insulted innocents." Oh, how my head hurts... -- John White johnjohn at triceratops.com PGP Public Key: http://www.triceratops.com/john/public-key.pgp From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 25 15:39:48 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA00858; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 13:39:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id NAA00850 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 13:39:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FSM-1.PICA.ARMY.MIL (fsm-1.pica.army.mil [129.139.96.87]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id UAA13356 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 20:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 22 Apr 99 23:11:15 EDT From: Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: indecipherable bounce messages Message-ID: <9904222311.aa02412@fsm-1.fsm-1.pica.army.mil> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >> I really hate the stupid alum relays at MIT. > >Same here. MIT has the only mail systems that reliably and deliberately >break bounce handling so badly that it defeats VERP. I have a bunch of >majordomo lists, and each message goes out with an envelope address like: > >majordom-virt-list-user=domain@iecc.com > >where virt identifies the virtual domain where the list lives, list is the >list name with punctuation squeezed out, and user=domain is the user@domain >recipient address. It happens that the mail host is named ivan.iecc.com, so >MIT's mailer rewrites bounce addresses to: > >majordom-virt-list-user=domain%iecc.com@ivan.iecc.com What did the folks at MIT say when you asked them why they do this? Tom Coradeschi, Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer http://k-whiner.pica.army.mil/info-labview/info-labview.html From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 25 15:54:53 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA00939; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 13:40:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id NAA00924 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 13:39:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bigtime.blank.org (bigtime.blank.org [139.167.64.222]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id JAA24940 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 09:10:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 7968 invoked by uid 500); 23 Apr 1999 16:11:47 -0000 Message-ID: <19990423121147.U3829@blank.org> Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:11:47 -0400 From: "Nathan J. Mehl" To: Jenni Benji Baier Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Another Iname/anonymous mail aliasing problem References: <19990421204900.K3829@blank.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i In-Reply-To: ; from Jenni Benji Baier on Fri, Apr 23, 1999 at 05:51:42AM -0500 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In the immortal words of Jenni Benji Baier (benji@coiinc.com): > > Someone set up an iname/mail.com account and has it forwarded to the list > address. This acct has been subscribed to many commercial mailing lists > as well... I'm not sure if this was intentional or if it was just a > co-incidence (its the kind of address that some people might use as a > "dummy" address if don't really want to disclose their email but the feild > is required.) Since the list only posts messages from subscribers, these > junkmails don't get distributed, but they do bounce and create errors. Ack, that's annoying. If you give me the name of the list, I can track down the culprit account. > While it is true that aliasing issues would exist regardless of the > free/anonymous services, these third party alias providers make the task > of tracking down abusers that much more difficult. Privacy issues prevent > the alias providers from disclosing useful information, and while they may > be responsive as far as shutting down an account, that is of little > consolation when the offending party can simply register yet another alias > and start over. I would like to see the alias provider to pass my > complaint on to the offender's ISP (whomever is responsible for the IP > address that the offender was using when he registered and/or made changes > to the alias account), but I somehow doubt that will happen. Well, we've found that dealing with the downstream ISPs that our users come from to be... of debatable utility. :/ We can, however, block IP ranges from signing up accounts, and have done so in the case of repeat offenders. Usually they eventually give up and go pester somebody else. -n ------------------------------------------------------------ "I like my beer cold, my TV loud, and my homosexuals FLAAAA-MING!" (--Homer Simpson) ------------------------------------------------ From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 25 19:03:26 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA04497; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 18:59:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell7.ba.best.com (shell7.ba.best.com [206.184.139.138]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA04490 for ; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 18:59:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from cnorman@localhost) by shell7.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.sh) id TAA25882; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 19:00:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 19:00:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199904260200.TAA25882@shell7.ba.best.com> From: Cyndi Norman To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM CC: cnorman@best.com In-reply-to: <199904240728.JAA13811@quill.thinkcoach.com> (message from Norbert Bollow on Sat, 24 Apr 1999 09:28:57 +0200) Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming Reply-to: cnorman@best.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 09:28:57 +0200 From: Norbert Bollow Are there other sites besides AOL who silently discard mail which trips their spam filters without any kind of alert to either the sender or the intended recipient of the message? I know of at least one smaller site that does that. I have no idea how many messages I wrote got lost because of that one sys admin. This site offers free email accounts to users of a particular very active newsgroup. I would often respond to posts from the newsgroup using the private mail setting on my newsreader. For a while I used an anti-spam return address. And off my messages went, into the ether. (Seems a very dumb policy to me.) I couldn't agree more. Of course, I would lose messages that didn't just go off into the ether either. Because the message telling me that mail didn't go through would get sent to my anti-spam address. This is one of the reasons I started posting with my real address only (btw, I don't seem to get more spam this way). Cyndi -- _______________________________________________________________________________ "There's nothing wrong with me. Maybe there's Cyndi Norman something wrong with the universe." (ST:TNG) cyndi@consultclarity.com http://www.consultclarity.com/ _________________ Owner of the Immune Website & Lists http://www.immuneweb.org/ From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 25 19:47:50 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id TAA04831; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 19:36:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id TAA04823 for ; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 19:36:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 19037 invoked by uid 100); 25 Apr 1999 22:38:06 -0400 Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 22:38:06 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: indecipherable bounce messages In-Reply-To: <9904222311.aa02412@fsm-1.fsm-1.pica.army.mil> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > > >majordom-virt-list-user=domain%iecc.com@ivan.iecc.com > > What did the folks at MIT say when you asked them why they do this? Nothing. I've written them a couple of times but they've never responded. Too busy maintaining spam relays or something. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 25 20:32:49 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id UAA05218; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 20:22:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.235.116.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id UAA05198 for ; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 20:22:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tpad.squawk.com (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA14927 for ; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 23:23:49 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990425225849.03e83be0@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 22:58:49 -0400 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: VERP Power In-Reply-To: <199904242028.PAA54136@Venus.mcs.net> References: <3.0.5.32.19990423230721.0366d4c0@127.0.0.1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 03:28 PM 4/24/99 -0500, David W. Tamkin wrote: >S> Can one bigfoot customer see that another bigfoot customer was BCC'd? > >It appears not. Then I'm glad that I put the "unless" in there so that I don't appear completely foolish. :-) OK, completely foolish to the uninitiated then. -- "I've got guns. I can't hit crap with them." - Howard Stern Nick Simicich mailto:njs@scifi.squawk.com or (last choice) mailto:njs@us.ibm.com http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html -- Stop by and Light Up The World! From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 26 10:52:05 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA02237; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 10:23:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu (BROCCOLI.GRAPHICS.CORNELL.EDU [128.84.247.53]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id KAA02230 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 10:23:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from graphics.cornell.edu (localhost.graphics.cornell.edu) by broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu with ESMTP (1.37.109.16/16.2) id AA109127261; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 13:21:02 -0400 Message-Id: <199904261721.AA109127261@broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97 To: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: responding vs. spamming In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 23 Apr 1999 16:33:58 PDT." <16456.924910438@monkeys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 13:21:01 -0400 From: Mitch Collinsworth Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>And all this time I thought the goal was to construct a _small_ list, >>by convincing people to get their systems _off_ the list. > >Well, that is a desirable side effect, but an unfortunate number of people >are still operating under the delusion that there is some advantage to >running mail servers as open relays that can be hijacked massively by >spammers. > >Over time, the size of that set is declining however, as more and more >have their servers crashed by spammers and/or have to deal with a sudden >massive influx of hate mail in the wake of a spmming/hijacking event. This may seem odd but we had the spam relay problem occur here and had our server hosed a few times, but we never experienced the expected sudden massive influx of hate mail. We had less than a dozen even for the largest weekend-long incidents and most of these were politely written. In fact 99.999% of the sudden influx of mail was bounces due to the spammer's list being full of invalid addresses. -Mitch From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 26 11:20:27 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA02645; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 10:50:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id KAA02635 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 10:50:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id VAA05670 for list-managers; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 21:17:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199904260417.VAA05670@honor.greatcircle.com> From: mcb@greatcircle.com (Michael C. Berch) Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 21:17:01 +0000 X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: list-managers Subject: Re: Another Iname/anonymous mail aliasing problem Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk The members of list-managers might be amused to know that a previous message in this thread, entitled "Another Iname/anonymous mail aliasing problem", was bounced by Iname due to an anonymous mail aliasing problem. Sigh. Nathan, I appreciate your messages, but can you get iname.com to at return the original recipient address when bouncing a message, either in a Received line, or in the bounce message? Essentially every other site around seems to manage that. The attached bounce appears to be typical. Needless to say, "beltrri@iris02.biocine.it" is not in any form on the list-managers list. -- Michael C. Berch list-managers list manager mcb@greatcircle.com > From owner-list-managers-owner Fri Apr 23 15:58:29 1999 > Received: from rmx05.globecomm.net (rmx05.iname.net [206.253.130.43]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA29439 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 15:58:25 -0700 (PDT) > Received: from localhost by rmx05.globecomm.net (8.9.1/8.8.0) with internal id SAA20130 > Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:59:31 -0400 (EDT) > From: Mail Delivery Subsystem > Message-Id: <199904232259.SAA20130@rmx05.globecomm.net> > To: > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; > boundary="SAA20130.924908371/rmx05.globecomm.net" > Subject: Returned mail: User unknown > Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure) > Status: OR > > This is a MIME-encapsulated message > > --SAA20130.924908371/rmx05.globecomm.net > > The original message was received at Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:59:28 -0400 (EDT) > from lmtp04.iname.net [206.253.130.32] > > ** > This is an automatic message to inform you that your email was not > forwarded through iName's server. > > The iName email address that you tried to send mail to may not be active. > Reasons for the failed delivery attempt could include: > > 1. The iName customer has selected a new personalized iName email address > rendering their old iName email address inactive. > > 2. The iName customer may have signed up for one of iName's free offers > and then not validated their forwarding address. > > 3 The address may simply be typed incorrectly. Please check that you > typed the email address correctly. > > iName provides email users with a permanent, personalized and secure email > address that is independent of how one accesses the Internet. iName acts > as a global forwarding service. All email sent to a permanent iName address > is automatically forwarded to a user specified destination email address. > Please visit iName's Online Support Area at > http://www.iname.com/info/intro/index.html for further information. > ** > > ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- > > > ----- Transcript of session follows ----- > ... while talking to mail.biocine.it.: > >>> RCPT To: > <<< 550 rmx05.iname.net... The addressee is not known > 550 ... User unknown > > --SAA20130.924908371/rmx05.globecomm.net > Content-Type: message/delivery-status > > Reporting-MTA: dns; rmx05.globecomm.net > Received-From-MTA: DNS; lmtp04.iname.net > Arrival-Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:59:28 -0400 (EDT) > > Final-Recipient: RFC822; beltrri@iris02.biocine.it > Action: failed > Status: 5.1.1 > Remote-MTA: DNS; mail.biocine.it > Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 rmx05.iname.net... The addressee is not known > Last-Attempt-Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:59:31 -0400 (EDT) > > --SAA20130.924908371/rmx05.globecomm.net > Content-Type: text/rfc822-headers > > Received: from smv12.iname.net by rmx05.globecomm.net (8.9.1/8.8.0) with SMTP id SAA20121 ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:59:28 -0400 (EDT) > Received: from honor.greatcircle.com (honor.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.44]) > by smv12.iname.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1SMV) with ESMTP id SAA20140; > Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:59:16 -0400 (EDT) > Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA27283; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:38:08 -0700 (PDT) > Received: from www.value.net (www-fr.value.net [207.33.92.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA27276 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:37:58 -0700 (PDT) > Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by www.value.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA21515; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:41:41 -0700 (PDT) > Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) > by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA10281; > Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:53:25 -0700 > To: "Jenni \"Benji\" Baier" > cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM > Subject: Re: Another Iname/anonymous mail aliasing problem > In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 23 Apr 1999 05:51:42 -0500. > > From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" > Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:53:24 -0700 > Message-ID: <10279.924897204@monkeys.com> > Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM > Precedence: bulk > > --SAA20130.924908371/rmx05.globecomm.net-- From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 26 15:05:48 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA05355; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 14:31:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.mpoweredpc.net (dns1.mpoweredpc.net [142.177.185.110]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id OAA05333 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 14:30:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.23.13.22] (helo=ns.sympatico.ca) by smtp.mpoweredpc.net with esmtp (Exim 2.04 #2) id 10bsvA-0002iW-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 18:28:08 -0300 Message-ID: <3724DA6F.9AD4480B@ns.sympatico.ca> Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 18:28:16 -0300 From: cybergram X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: world.std.com problems?? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, I am the listkeeper for 4 lists with world.std.com. We didn't have mail delivery on one of the lists for 24 hours & it's just trickling back to normal now. Has anyone else had this problem? I was getting,as listkeeper, an undeliverable for 12 hours will keep trying for 3 days message.The message also said: 451 mailer prog died with signal 213 Any ideas?? Thank you, Nancy From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 26 16:45:44 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA06815; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 16:35:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dewey.mindlink.net (dewey.mindlink.net [204.174.16.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id QAA06803 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 16:34:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from l013.abb.dial.paralynx.net ([204.174.29.141] helo=Main) by dewey.mindlink.net with smtp (Exim 2.11 #5) id 10busj-00028W-00 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 16:33:46 -0700 From: "Mally" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 16:35:39 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Another Iname/anonymous mail aliasing problem References: <19990421204900.K3829@blank.org> In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Message-Id: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ~~~snipping~~~ > While it is true that aliasing issues would exist regardless of the > free/anonymous services, these third party alias providers make the task > of tracking down abusers that much more difficult. Privacy issues prevent > the alias providers from disclosing useful information, and while they may > be responsive as far as shutting down an account, that is of little > consolation when the offending party can simply register yet another alias > and start over. I would like to see the alias provider to pass my > complaint on to the offender's ISP (whomever is responsible for the IP > address that the offender was using when he registered and/or made changes > to the alias account), but I somehow doubt that will happen. Very rarely does happen in my experience. Usually that complaint just gets ignored. > The other other list admins and I (as well as the network admins for the > network that hosts the box that the list server runs on) have discussed > banning known anonymous mail relays and other problem sites from > subscribing to the list, for this and other reasons. I'm already the > admin for other lists that have had a more restrictive subscription policy > for a long time... often they require a questionnaire be completed before > they can subscribe. It may be inconvenient, but it seems to help. Anyone > have any thoughts about this? We've just decided to implement an "interview" process ourselves for remail addresses and certain ISP's, as well as running 'closed+confirm" of course. All remail sub's have to provide a legitimate, confirmable, ISP address which admin. keeps confidential from the rest of the members. If those who want to subscribe using a remailler don't like any of the process, then we figure our list wouldn't be the place for them to feel at home anyway. The simplest solution of course would be to ban all remail subscribes. But we're a support list for a group of very nervous people and don't want to cut off access to anyone in need. And many people use their work computers and are worried to bits about their employers finding out. So if they're willing to go through the somewhat tedious checks to get subbed, at least we can get them subscribed. Mally :) From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 26 17:15:25 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA07347; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:10:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id RAA07338 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:10:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bigtime.blank.org (bigtime.blank.org [139.167.64.222]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id OAA05172 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 14:22:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 21153 invoked by uid 500); 26 Apr 1999 21:21:35 -0000 Message-ID: <19990426172135.C2253@blank.org> Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:21:35 -0400 From: "Nathan J. Mehl" To: "Michael C. Berch" , list-managers@honor.greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Another Iname/anonymous mail aliasing problem References: <199904260417.VAA05670@honor.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i In-Reply-To: <199904260417.VAA05670@honor.greatcircle.com>; from Michael C. Berch on Sun, Apr 25, 1999 at 09:17:01PM +0000 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In the immortal words of Michael C. Berch (mcb@GreatCircle.COM): > > Nathan, I appreciate your messages, (Sheesh, nobody seems to remember that I've been active on this list for years. Strange when your job's noteriety overwhelms your own...) > but can you get iname.com to > at return the original recipient address when bouncing a > message, either in a Received line, or in the bounce message? > Essentially every other site around seems to manage that. I'm actually pleased to announce that I had a word with development about the problem, and our new software release, completed at 5pm today, will include indicative "for" and "from" information encoded into the Received headers. Um, as long as we're exchanging favors, would it be possible to do anything about the fact that it seems to take, on average, twelve to thirty-six hours for mail I send to the list to make it back to my account? (blank.org is my personal domain on my personal box, and I _know_ that it's accessible...) > The attached bounce appears to be typical. Needless to say, > "beltrri@iris02.biocine.it" is not in any form on the list-managers > list. Your culprit is "rbeltrami". -n ------------------------------------------------------------ If people buy more copies of Unreal than Quake2, we will have to re-evaluate our design decisions. If people buy more copies of Jedi Knight than Quake2, we will have to see about getting a Star Wars license :-). (--Brian Hook, id Software) ------------------------------------------------ From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 26 17:44:57 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA07647; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:36:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id RAA07639 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:36:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id RAA07366; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:12:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199904270012.RAA07366@honor.greatcircle.com> From: mcb@greatcircle.com (Michael C. Berch) Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:12:38 +0000 In-Reply-To: <19990426172135.C2253@blank.org> X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: list-managers@honor.greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Another Iname/anonymous mail aliasing problem Cc: "Nathan J. Mehl" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > In the immortal words of Michael C. Berch (mcb@GreatCircle.COM): > > > > Nathan, I appreciate your messages, > > (Sheesh, nobody seems to remember that I've been active on this > list for years. Strange when your job's noteriety overwhelms your > own...) Thanks for the reply -- alas, the memory of the Net is short indeed. > > > but can you get iname.com to > > at return the original recipient address when bouncing a > > message, either in a Received line, or in the bounce message? > > Essentially every other site around seems to manage that. > > I'm actually pleased to announce that I had a word with development > about the problem, and our new software release, completed at 5pm > today, will include indicative "for" and "from" information encoded > into the Received headers. Cool! Definitely looking forward to that. > Um, as long as we're exchanging favors, would it be possible to > do anything about the fact that it seems to take, on average, > twelve to thirty-six hours for mail I send to the list to make > it back to my account? (blank.org is my personal domain on my > personal box, and I _know_ that it's accessible...) Hmmm. I think the problem is that you are subscribed to list-managers at a different address than your messages originate from, and since the lists here are (intentionally) members-only for posting, they get held for Majordomo for approval. I have the list owner mail batched up overnight and I usually look at it late at night, or early in the morning. However, I when I notice, or on request, I add peoples' mail-sending addresses to a ".friends" list that can post without approval, and I have added yours. And thanks for the detective work on the address... -- Michael C. Berch list-managers list manager mcb@greatcircle.com From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 26 21:28:39 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA10053; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 21:25:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-out-0.tiac.net (mail-out-0.tiac.net [199.0.65.247]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id VAA10039; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 21:25:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from posterchild1.tiac.net (posterchild1.tiac.net [199.0.65.72]) by mail-out-0.tiac.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id AAA15366; Tue, 27 Apr 1999 00:24:22 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from stanr@sunspot.tiac.net) Received: from sunspot.tiac.net (sunspot.tiac.net [199.0.65.22]) by posterchild1.tiac.net (8.8.8/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA14453; Tue, 27 Apr 1999 04:24:22 GMT Received: (from stanr@localhost) by sunspot.tiac.net (8.8.8/8.6.9) id AAA01677; Tue, 27 Apr 1999 00:23:05 -0400 (EDT) From: Stan Ryckman Message-Id: <199904270423.AAA01677@sunspot.tiac.net> Subject: this list's mail (Was: Re: Another Iname/anonymous mail aliasing problem) In-Reply-To: <199904270012.RAA07366@honor.greatcircle.com> from "Michael C. Berch" at "Apr 26, 99 05:12:38 pm" To: mcb@GreatCircle.COM (Michael C. Berch) Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 00:23:03 -0400 (EDT) Cc: list-managers@honor.greatcircle.com Organization: Amber & Sneakers Fan Club X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL40 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Michael C. Berch wrote, [attribution lost] > > Um, as long as we're exchanging favors, would it be possible to > > do anything about the fact that it seems to take, on average, > > twelve to thirty-six hours for mail I send to the list to make > > it back to my account? (blank.org is my personal domain on my > > personal box, and I _know_ that it's accessible...) > > Hmmm. I think the problem is that you are subscribed to list-managers > at a different address than your messages originate from, and since > the lists here are (intentionally) members-only for posting, they > get held for Majordomo for approval. There is *definitely* something wrong, or at least very weird, with the way mail from this list is distributed. I am subscribed from two addresses: stanr@tiac.net stanr@sunspot.tiac.net for historical reasons; this was intended to be temporary but I've let it go as an experiment, meaning to write about it. They both go to the same mailbox. *ALL* mail from List-Managers, not just my own posts, is delayed to me. And the tiac.net mail arrives HOURS ahead of the sunspot.tiac.net mail. From anywhere else on the internet, sunspot is slightly faster (one or two less hops). It's as if they're being doled out one at a time, with some huge batch in between them. (I can tell which is which by a "for" in the Received headers.) Just a random example: Nathan Mehl's recent post in this thread, see below. The delays are typical. Appreciate it if you could explain. (GreatCircle.com isn't still using that paper tape interface to the internet, is it? :) Cheers, Stan Header orders reversed (oldest first here) and cut to user-friendly line lengths: Both copies: Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:21:35 -0400 Received: from bigtime.blank.org (bigtime.blank.org [139.167.64.222]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id OAA05172 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 14:22:43 -0700 (PDT) ... Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA07347; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:10:44 -0700 (PDT) copy 1: (delivered 1 hour 24 minutes after RAA07347): Received: from honor.greatcircle.com (honor.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.44]) by mx1.tiac.net (8.8.8/8.6.9) with ESMTP id VAA09290 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 21:34:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mx1.tiac.net (mx1.tiac.net [199.0.65.251]) by maildeliver0.tiac.net (8.8.8/8.8) with ESMTP id VAA30260 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 21:34:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from maildeliver0.tiac.net (maildeliver0.tiac.net [199.0.65.19]) by shell1.tiac.net (8.8.8/8.6.9) with ESMTP id VAA00987 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 21:34:26 -0400 (EDT) copy 2: (delivered 3 hours 15 minutes after RAA07347): Received: from honor.greatcircle.com (honor.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.44]) by shell1.tiac.net (8.8.8/8.6.9) with ESMTP id XAA06279 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 23:25:20 -0400 (EDT) From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 30 14:14:16 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA16556; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 14:01:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu (BROCCOLI.GRAPHICS.CORNELL.EDU [128.84.247.53]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id OAA16547 for ; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 14:01:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from graphics.cornell.edu (localhost.graphics.cornell.edu) by broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu with ESMTP (1.37.109.16/16.2) id AA174036048; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 17:00:48 -0400 Message-Id: <199904302100.AA174036048@broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: When lawyers run the internet Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 17:00:47 -0400 From: Mitch Collinsworth Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk The following appeared in today's Risks-Forum Digest, Volume 20, Issue 35, available at http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/20.35.html As I read it I began to wonder if perhaps I should ban Intel addresses from my lists, seeing as how they are recreational in nature and this judge's definition makes me uncomfortable sending anything to their private network that doesn't pertain directly to their business. What do y'all think? -Mitch --------- Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 08:17:45 -0700 From: "NewsScan" Subject: Court labels unwanted e-mails "trespassing" A California court has ruled that mass e-mails sent to Intel workers by a disgruntled former employee were an illegal form of trespass, setting a new legal boundary between private computer networks and the public Internet. The case had centered on a barrage of unsolicited e-mail messages sent by Ken Hamidi, who'd been fired in 1995, criticizing Intel's workers' compensation policies and other issues. Intel had sued Hamidi, charging misuse of the company's computer networking resources, and Judge John R. Lewis agreed, comparing borders between computer networks to property boundaries: "The mere connection of Intel's e-mail system with the Internet does not covert it into a public forum." Meanwhile, some legal scholars questioned the judge's analogy: "In the real world, trespass involves physical presence," says Jonathan Zittrain, a law lecturer at Harvard. "But in this case, it's his speech they're restricting." However, the judge noted that Intel has never published its employees' e-mail addresses, strengthening its argument that its computer system is private company property rather than a public gathering place. (*Los Angeles Times*, 29 Apr 1999, http://www.latimes.com/home/business/t000038417.html) From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 30 14:58:09 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA17050; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 14:56:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.postmodern.com (server.postmodern.com [209.157.82.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id OAA17043 for ; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 14:56:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mcb@localhost) by server.postmodern.com (8.8.5/mcb-980201) id OAA26705; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 14:56:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199904302156.OAA26705@server.postmodern.com> From: mcb@postmodern.com (Michael C. Berch) Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 14:56:21 +0000 In-Reply-To: <199904302100.AA174036048@broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu> X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: When lawyers run the internet Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > The following appeared in today's Risks-Forum Digest, Volume 20, Issue 35, > available at http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/20.35.html > > As I read it I began to wonder if perhaps I should ban Intel addresses > from my lists, seeing as how they are recreational in nature and this > judge's definition makes me uncomfortable sending anything to their > private network that doesn't pertain directly to their business. > What do y'all think? I don't see any relationship at all. The key word in the lawsuit, and in the judge's opinion, is "unsolicited". Neither you, nor I, nor other list managers (I hope), will be sending unsolicited mail to Intel or anywhere else. If Intel, speaking through one of its employee accountholders, requests mail from a mailing list, you cannot be charged with sending unsolicited mail. Whether that mail is an appropriate use of their systems is between Intel management and the employee, but if it is solicited, that does not affect you. -- Michael C. Berch mcb@postmodern.com From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 30 16:12:30 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA17798; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 16:11:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-out-0.tiac.net (mail-out-0.tiac.net [199.0.65.247]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id QAA17791 for ; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 16:11:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-out-3.tiac.net (mail-out-3.tiac.net [199.0.65.15]) by mail-out-0.tiac.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id TAA27829; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 19:11:00 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from stanr@sunspot.tiac.net) Received: from sunspot.tiac.net (sunspot.tiac.net [199.0.65.22]) by mail-out-3.tiac.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17845; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 19:11:00 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from stanr@sunspot.tiac.net) Received: (from stanr@localhost) by sunspot.tiac.net (8.8.8/8.6.9) id TAA27330; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 19:09:41 -0400 (EDT) From: Stan Ryckman Message-Id: <199904302309.TAA27330@sunspot.tiac.net> Subject: Re: When lawyers run the internet In-Reply-To: <199904302100.AA174036048@broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu> from Mitch Collinsworth at "Apr 30, 99 05:00:47 pm" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 19:09:39 -0400 (EDT) Cc: stanr@sunspot.tiac.net (Stan Ryckman), stanr@ma.ultranet.com (S G Ryckman) Organization: Amber & Sneakers Fan Club X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL40 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Mitch Collinsworth wrote: > As I read it I began to wonder if perhaps I should ban Intel addresses > from my lists, seeing as how they are recreational in nature and this > judge's definition makes me uncomfortable sending anything to their > private network that doesn't pertain directly to their business. > What do y'all think? The people at those addresses *asked* you to send material to those addresses, so it's clearly not trespass. (You're not sending UE are you? :-) Cheers, Stan From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 30 16:57:30 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA18039; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 16:49:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gsp.org (rsk.itw.com [208.211.3.21]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id QAA18032 for ; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 16:49:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsk@localhost) by gsp.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA19352 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 19:49:46 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 19:49:40 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: When lawyers run the internet Message-ID: <19990430194940.A19344@gsp.org> References: <199904302100.AA174036048@broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: <199904302100.AA174036048@broccoli.graphics.cornell.edu>; from Mitch Collinsworth on Fri, Apr 30, 1999 at 05:00:47PM -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Fri, Apr 30, 1999 at 05:00:47PM -0400, Mitch Collinsworth wrote: > As I read it I began to wonder if perhaps I should ban Intel addresses > from my lists, seeing as how they are recreational in nature and this > judge's definition makes me uncomfortable sending anything to their I think your concerns are misplaced. There's an obvious difference between solicited mail (via subscriptions to mailing lists) and UBE. ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk@gsp.org From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 30 22:27:30 1999 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA20673; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 22:14:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id WAA20666 for ; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 22:14:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197] (may be forged)) by plaidworks.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id WAA35260 ; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 22:19:38 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199904302309.TAA27330@sunspot.tiac.net> References: <199904302309.TAA27330@sunspot.tiac.net> Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 22:08:58 -0700 To: Stan Ryckman , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: When lawyers run the internet Cc: stanr@sunspot.tiac.net (Stan Ryckman), stanr@ma.ultranet.com (S G Ryckman) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 7:09 PM -0400 4/30/99, Stan Ryckman wrote: > The people at those addresses *asked* you to send material to those > addresses, so it's clearly not trespass. some people don't pay too much attention. I've been getting officious, snotty cease and desist letters from various agencies for years, on requested subscriptions. Coast Guard bases are really notable for this. Some mid-admin gets a burr up their nose and starts snooping for "non professional" use of the mail systems, and starts sending out letters. My answer: tell your users not to subscribe in the first place. But evidently some of tehse guys think I'm a mindreader, and know which sites don't allow this kinda stuff.... But I don't worry about it. but it IS, I think, another argument FOR mail-back validation, because you have a nice proof that it wasn't unsolicited or forged. -- Chuq Von Rospach (Hockey fan? ) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) + Featuring Winslow Leach at the Piano!