From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 5 17:10:39 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA27551; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 16:02:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) id QAA27541 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 16:02:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.rev.net (mail.rev.net [206.67.68.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id FAA05706 for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 05:25:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fantasy (USER13.GVA.NET [216.80.135.17]) by mail.rev.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e54CPci22572 for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 08:25:39 -0400 Message-Id: <200006041225.e54CPci22572@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 08:25:32 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Is listbot.com for real? X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I was just wondering if listbot is a real MLM site or just a spamhaven. This morning I got _two_ messages from listbot.com claiming that some bogus [and obviously all-spam] "mailing list" had been moved to listbot and it gave me an email address to unsubscribe via. What's interesting is that the two addresses that I was subscribed under are [respectively] 10 and 4 years old [that is, that's how long it has been since I last used them for anything]. /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 7 12:06:38 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA03580; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 12:05:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.rev.net (mail.rev.net [206.67.68.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA03568 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 12:05:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from admin3 (admin3.rev.net [12.26.100.205]) by mail.rev.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e57J6OO02321 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 15:06:24 -0400 Message-Id: <200006071906.e57J6OO02321@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 15:06:22 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums Reply-to: bernie@fantasyfarm.com X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Dumb question time: I was e-chatting with a colleague and I mentioned that IMO it was impolite and improper to forward a person's postings in one forum to another forum without their knowledge and consent. He argued back, in essence, that "public is public", and it wasn't like he had divulged private correspondence or anything, and I should just chill out... So I poked around a bit at a bunch of online netiquette resources and I was rather surprised NOT to find support for my position. I still think it is reasonable and polite, but apparently the net-standards for behavior don't agree. For example, RFC 1855 says... - If you are forwarding or re-posting a message you've received, do not change the wording. If the message was a personal message to you and you are re-posting to a group, you should ask permission first... And clearly by implication if it was *NOT* a personal message that asking permission is not necessary... Am I off base here? It seems that way ... [I'm a bit more disturbed than I ought to be about something relatively minor like this mostly because I've played this game for a LONG time now and it is always a bit unsettling to learn that something you took for granted not only wasn't "obvious" but might even be against-the-flow]. Also, it would have implications for the "copyright" crowd: if the long-standing internet standard is "public is public", then one would have a much weaker claim [if anyone actually dared to bring such a suit] to claim copyright restrictions in blocking further-propagation of postings to new/strange forums --- it would seem to be pefectly adequate to reply that the implied-license of sending a submission to a public list is broad, indeed]. /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 7 13:22:51 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA04227; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 13:15:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id NAA04218 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 13:15:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA59454 ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 13:17:16 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200006071906.e57J6OO02321@mail.rev.net> References: <200006071906.e57J6OO02321@mail.rev.net> Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 13:15:24 -0700 To: bernie@fantasyfarm.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 3:06 PM -0400 6/7/2000, Bernie Cosell wrote: >Dumb question time: I was e-chatting with a colleague and I mentioned >that IMO it was impolite and improper to forward a person's postings >in one forum to another forum without their knowledge and consent. >He argued back, in essence, that "public is public", and it wasn't >like he had divulged private correspondence or anything, and I should >just chill out... I think, basically, that I agree with the "chill" aspect. When I do this, I try to make sure I don't mess with the context. Attribution depends on the situation, but if it's the person's piece, I carry forward the attribution. if it's more "straight news", I don't. but if someone posts something to one of my hockey lists that's relevant to another list, I sure don't see the problem in forwarding it. Now, if I took something posted to the Dallas Stars list and forwarded it to the New Jersey Devil's list with a "look what this idiot said about us, let's get him", it'd be different... I think it fits okay under fair use. I mean, in reality, most lists have archives today, and nobody would think twice about pointing with a URL to the same message in an archive, right? so we're simply cutting a level of indirection out of the loop. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 7 14:08:04 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA04611; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 13:56:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from roscoe.burstmedia.com ([207.159.105.131]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id NAA04604 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 13:56:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by roscoe.burstmedia.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10) id ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 16:57:58 -0400 Message-ID: From: Bob McCown To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: RE: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 16:57:58 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Just another datapoint, but it applies. Recently, a bunch of thread responses on Slashdot (www.slashdot.org) were taken, and were going to be put into a book. There was such a hew and cry from the people that posted, they decided NOT to publish the book, but make it in electronic format. -=Bob -----Original Message----- From: Bernie Cosell [mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 3:06 PM To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums Dumb question time: I was e-chatting with a colleague and I mentioned that IMO it was impolite and improper to forward a person's postings in one forum to another forum without their knowledge and consent. He argued back, in essence, that "public is public", and it wasn't like he had divulged private correspondence or anything, and I should just chill out... So I poked around a bit at a bunch of online netiquette resources and I was rather surprised NOT to find support for my position. I still think it is reasonable and polite, but apparently the net-standards for behavior don't agree. For example, RFC 1855 says... - If you are forwarding or re-posting a message you've received, do not change the wording. If the message was a personal message to you and you are re-posting to a group, you should ask permission first... And clearly by implication if it was *NOT* a personal message that asking permission is not necessary... Am I off base here? It seems that way ... [I'm a bit more disturbed than I ought to be about something relatively minor like this mostly because I've played this game for a LONG time now and it is always a bit unsettling to learn that something you took for granted not only wasn't "obvious" but might even be against-the-flow]. Also, it would have implications for the "copyright" crowd: if the long-standing internet standard is "public is public", then one would have a much weaker claim [if anyone actually dared to bring such a suit] to claim copyright restrictions in blocking further-propagation of postings to new/strange forums --- it would seem to be pefectly adequate to reply that the implied-license of sending a submission to a public list is broad, indeed]. /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 7 16:22:38 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA06368; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 16:13:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.pacifier.com (comet.pacifier.com [199.2.117.155]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id QAA06361 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 16:13:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell.pacifier.com (IDENT:neil@shell.pacifier.com [199.2.117.66]) by smtp.pacifier.com (8.9.3/8.9.3pop) with ESMTP id QAA10978 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 16:14:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 16:14:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Neil To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: restrict post question Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I have several email lists, hosted at my ISP, to which I have restricted access with a password. I use a Unix email program so I was able to add 'Approved: password' to the header and then the 'Subject: whatever' line shows up in the header; when those who use a Windows email program try it, the 'Subject:' line in the header ends up being blank. The reason is that the they have to put 'Approved: password' on the first line of the body of the message. What I would like to do is eliminate the need for a password by setting up a restric_post in the config file. The assistant unix admin at my ISP said he would be happy to "touch" a file for me but he doesn't know much about majordomo and would need instructions. The system is a BSD (OpenBSD to be exact). Could someone tell me what file he needs to touch and the permissions and can it be writeable so I can add emails to it? Also, what exactly do I put in the config file? As much simple detail as possible would be appreciated. If there is another, better way to restrict who can send to a list then I am open to suggestions. Thanks. Neil Neil From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 8 07:37:55 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA16948; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 07:30:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asante.asante.com (asante.asante.COM [192.108.250.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id HAA16941 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 07:30:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pacbell.net (IDENT:bpm@archy.asante.COM [192.203.52.121]) by asante.asante.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA00373 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 07:34:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200006081434.HAA00373@asante.asante.com> Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 06:36:01 -0700 (PDT) From: bmullins@pacbell.net, UNEXPECTED_DATA_AFTER_ADDRESS@.SYNTAX-ERROR Reply-To: bmullins@pacbell.net Subject: Re: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums To: 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 On 7 Jun, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > I think it fits okay under fair use. I mean, in reality, most lists > have archives today, and nobody would think twice about pointing > with a URL to the same message in an archive, right? so we're simply > cutting a level of indirection out of the loop. Interesting point. In general I don't forward without asking permission, but I also spend a lot of time on a list with closed archives. The understanding on that list is pretty clearly that asking before forwarding is expected. -- Breen Mullins San Mateo, Calif. From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 8 09:07:55 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id IAA17712; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 08:59:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id IAA17703 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 08:59:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tomw70 (dsl_120w70 [151.202.20.126]) by grassyhill.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA90947 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 11:59:56 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from tneff@panix.com) From: "Tom Neff" To: Subject: Re: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 12:00:41 -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 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <200006080800.BAA10974@honor.greatcircle.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Forwarding an informational post from one topical public forum to another related-topic forum is not considered rude, although if you wanted to be extra nice, you could notify the original author that you've done this, so they're not surprised to hear from strangers later on. A good example: an announcement of, say, a Lyle Lovett benefit concert is posted to a general music forum by the show's organizers, and a reader passes the posting on to the Lyle Lovett fan forum. Forwarding flame posts to every group you can think of for the purpose of informing a wider world what an idiot your opponent is, is considered rude. :) Forwarding an entire Digest for the sake of a five line posting buried inside is considered rude. Forwarding a binary encoded HTML MIME attachment from some board or forum into a text based list or Digest is considered rude regardless of the author's intentions. > -----Original Message----- > From: "Bernie Cosell" > Subject: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums > > Dumb question time: I was e-chatting with a colleague and I mentioned > that IMO it was impolite and improper to forward a person's postings > in one forum to another forum without their knowledge and consent. > He argued back, in essence, that "public is public", and it wasn't > like he had divulged private correspondence or anything, and I should > just chill out... From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 8 09:22:55 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA17918; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 09:19:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA17911 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 09:19:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tomw70 (dsl_120w70 [151.202.20.126]) by grassyhill.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA91676 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 12:19:57 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from tneff@panix.com) From: "Tom Neff" To: Subject: headers beyond Approved Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 12:20:43 -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 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <200006080800.BAA10974@honor.greatcircle.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Neil wrote: > I have several email lists, hosted at my ISP, to which I have restricted > access with a password. > > I use a Unix email program so I was able to add 'Approved: password' to > the header and then the 'Subject: whatever' line shows up in the > header; when those who use a Windows email program try it, the 'Subject:' > line in the header ends up being blank. The reason is that the they have > to put 'Approved: password' on the first line of the body of the message. Although you don't say so explicitly, I assume these are Majordomo lists. I recommend mentioning the name and version of the list software you're using when requesting technical help. An often overlooked feature of Majordomo is this: When you put the Approved: header in the first line of the message body, you can KEEP ADDING HEADER LINES in that "block" before a blank line separates you from the actual body text that Majordomo will approve through. In some cases it is necessary to do this in order for the header fields to come out non-blank in the final message or Digest. So for example +--------------------------- | From: tweed@tammany.org header | To: spainlovers@lists.net | Subject: +--------------------------- +--------------------------- | Approved: guernica body | Subject: Good places to hide? | From: An Anonymous Civic Leader | | I am looking for a discreet hidey hole where my wretched | enemies will be unable to hunt me down. Private replies | preferred. Please don't tell Nast. +--------------------------- You may still prefer to mess with restrict_post, but I wanted to make sure people know how to overcome the Approved blank-header problem. I think this is all being addressed in newer Majordomos. From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 8 09:52:58 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA18155; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 09:45:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.rev.net (mail.rev.net [206.67.68.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA18148 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 09:45:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from admin3 (admin3.rev.net [12.26.100.205]) by mail.rev.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e58GkQp21196 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 12:46:27 -0400 Message-Id: <200006081646.e58GkQp21196@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 12:46:24 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums Reply-to: bernie@fantasyfarm.com In-reply-to: <393EBFD2.E35EA0D2@louisiana.edu> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 7 Jun 00, at 16:34, Istvan Berkeley wrote: > ...I think > that RFC 1855 is misleading here. The issue is really one about > copyright.... My understanding is that, for the purposes of the > law e-mail should be treated like a letter. If I send a (private) > letter, or e-mail to you, whilst you own the physical object (or virtual > object in the case of e-mail), I would still hold the copyright on the > content. I asked about 'netiquette' and tried to leave aside the question of whether it was *LEGAL* to forward a message on to other forums.... not because it is an uninteresting or unimportant aspect of the question, but for two reasons: 1) AFAIK it has *NEVER* been tested in court, and so when you say "should be treated like a letter" I'm pretty sure that you [or your legal-advisor] is just guessing/analogizing. And because email is used for so many things [and indeed, private email will almost certainly if/when the law gets around to dealing with it, be addressed separately from email sent knowingly and intentionally to an unrestricted public forum] I think that the final 'analogy' will end up being a LOT more complicated than just 'like a letter'. 2) Apart from copyrights and the matter of 'fair use' there's a secondary question of implied-license. When an author chooses to 'broadcast' their work to an unrestricted public forum, they have _clearly_ conceded *some* copying-rights. But exactly which rights? And to whom? And under what circumstances? And we have thrashed that out some [and it does surface again from time to time as moderators claim "compilation copyrights" and such], but I was really asking the somewhat "squishier" question --- if you will, it is the _precursor_ to deciding what the law ought to say: thinking about what's "right" and "proper"... And I didn't really weigh in with my thinking on this [I just tossed out the 'teaser'], so let me rectify tha: I said that I thought it improper to repost without permission... I have two reasons why: 1) public is not necessarily public. A person might dislike or disapprove of some forums, or have bad blood with some of its participants or for any or no reason NOT want their stuff to appear _there_ [even if they might be otherwise mellow about its being reposted someplace else]. If you don't ask permission the author doesn't get the chance to inform you of their preferences. 2) The person is separated from the discussion [and perhaps debate!] engendered by their reposted comments. This seems pretty unfair -- they don't have a chance to defend themselves, to correct misconceptions, to answer and expand on questions that arise. Someone commented about how it is inappropriate to put in a prologue "Look at what this idiot said...", but even without the prologue, posting the words themselves in a 'hostile' forum might get the same reaction. /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 8 10:37:58 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA18632; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:32:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id KAA18625 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:32:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA37020 ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:34:01 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200006081434.HAA00373@asante.asante.com> References: <200006081434.HAA00373@asante.asante.com> Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:32:04 -0700 To: bmullins@pacbell.net, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 6:36 AM -0700 6/8/2000, bmullins@pacbell.net, >Interesting point. In general I don't forward without asking permission, >but I also spend a lot of time on a list with closed archives. The >understanding on that list is pretty clearly that asking before >forwarding is expected. with closed archives, that makes sense. In situations like these, I'd make these expectations explicit in the list rules. I guess it comes down to "if the poster has an expectation of privacy (or at least discretion), they should get it. the more public the postings are, the less I worry about redirecting the content. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 8 13:22:55 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA20337; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 13:15:10 -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 NAA20329 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 13:15:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 10340 invoked by uid 100); 8 Jun 2000 16:16:29 -0400 Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 16:16:27 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Bernie Cosell cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums In-Reply-To: <200006081646.e58GkQp21196@mail.rev.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I asked about 'netiquette' and tried to leave aside the question of > whether it was *LEGAL* to forward a message on to other forums.... It's hard to see how it could be illegal unless your intention was to defame or harass, e.g., taking a message from someone else and reposting it in 100 random alt.sex groups. Turning email into a book is a separate issue, one of the fair use criteria is the commercial potential of material, and if it's valuable enough to put into a book, clearly the author deserves a crack at the money to be earned thereby. On the other hand, I've always felt that it's rude to forward mail without permission, regardless of the forum. In comp.compilers, I've always told anyone who forwarded a third party message to ask the original author to resend it, or at least confirm that it's OK to forward. And I've gotten occasional clueless but very angry mail from people who read a crossposted message in another newsgroup, replied to it, and got bent out of shape that the message showed up in my newsgroup. Regards, John Levine, comp.compilers moderator, johnl@iecc.com, http://iecc.com/compilers From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 8 15:24:51 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA21907; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 15:21:21 -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 PAA21899 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 15:21:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (fidelman@localhost) by ntcorp.dn.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27834 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 18:19:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 18:19:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Miles Fidelman X-Sender: fidelman@ntcorp.dn.net To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums 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 Jun 2000, John R Levine wrote: > > I asked about 'netiquette' and tried to leave aside the question of > > whether it was *LEGAL* to forward a message on to other forums.... > > It's hard to see how it could be illegal unless your intention was to defame > or harass, e.g., taking a message from someone else and reposting it in 100 since copyright remains with the author, whether it's legal to repost or not comes down to whether or not reposting falls under either an implied license or fair use - something that hasn't (to my knowledge) been estalished in either statutory or case law ************************************************************************** The Center for Civic Networking PO Box 600618 Miles R. Fidelman, President & Newtonville, MA 02460-0006 Director, Municipal Telecommunications Strategies Program 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 Thu Jun 8 16:09:29 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA22245; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 16:01:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from yellow.rahul.net (yellow.rahul.net [192.160.13.18]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id QAA22238 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 16:01:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rahul.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow.rahul.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 173EC7C37 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 16:03:22 -0700 (PDT) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums In-reply-to: Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 16:03:22 -0700 From: Michelle Dick Message-Id: <20000608230322.173EC7C37@yellow.rahul.net> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, 7 Jun 2000 16:57:58 -0400 Bob McCown wrote: > Just another datapoint, but it applies. Recently, a bunch of thread > responses on Slashdot (www.slashdot.org) were taken, and were going to be > put into a book. There was such a hew and cry from the people that posted, > they decided NOT to publish the book, but make it in electronic format. And I bet that, say, Salon.com and any of their (paid) columnists might be rather put out if I replicated one of their web articles on my site or extracted the articles and posted them regularly to a mailing list sans Salon.com formating and advertising using the justification that, well, anyone could view it on their website, point to it with a URL, and heck, *even have it emailed to anyone* with a click from their site. They MUST be putting it in the public domain. Yeah, right. I always welcome requests to repost my posts to other email lists, and almost always say yes. I also advise those who ask me if they can repost things from my lists to get permission from the poster. I consider it the most basic of netiquette irrespective of the copyright issues. -- Michelle Dick artemis@rahul.net East Palo Alto, CA From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 8 16:39:29 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA22416; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 16:34:19 -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 QAA22409 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 16:34:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by smtp2.vnet.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e58NZdN27268; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 19:35:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA09033; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 19:35:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 19:35:38 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: John R Levine cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums 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 Jun 2000, John R Levine wrote: > ... Turning email into a book is a separate issue, one of the > fair use criteria is the commercial potential of material, > and if it's valuable enough to put into a book, clearly the > author deserves a crack at the money to be earned thereby... To the best of my knowledge, profit has nothing to do with fair use criteria. Please cite a credible reference that supports your contention. - murr - From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 8 20:39:48 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id UAA24235; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 20:27:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toocan.com (adsl-63-203-59-66.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.203.59.66]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id UAA24228 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 20:27:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ar@localhost) by toocan.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA07705; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 20:28:52 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 20:28:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Ash To: murr rhame cc: John R Levine , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk hi murr, u r incorrect when you state that profit has nothing to do with fair use. fair use balances 4 elements: 1 the purpose and character of the use. 2 the nature of the copyrighted work. 3 the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole. 4 THE EFFECT OF THE USE ON THE POTENTIAL MARKET FOR, OR VALUE OF, THE COPYRIGHTED WORK element 4 is most definitely concerned with profit:) if u r interested in studying the issue more see title 17 United States Codes 101 et.seq.. (the section u write on is 107). u might find it helpful to use www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html hope it helps ash On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, murr rhame wrote: > On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, John R Levine wrote: > > > ... Turning email into a book is a separate issue, one of the > > fair use criteria is the commercial potential of material, > > and if it's valuable enough to put into a book, clearly the > > author deserves a crack at the money to be earned thereby... > > To the best of my knowledge, profit has nothing to do with fair > use criteria. Please cite a credible reference that supports > your contention. > > > - murr - > From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 9 02:10:55 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id CAA28084; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 02:01:32 -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 CAA28077 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 02:01:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by smtp2.vnet.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5992pw07189; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 05:02:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id FAA21729; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 05:02:51 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 05:02:50 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: Ash cc: John R Levine , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums 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 Jun 2000, Ash wrote: > fair use balances 4 elements: > > 1 the purpose and character of the use. > 2 the nature of the copyrighted work. > 3 the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to > the copyrighted work as a whole. > 4 THE EFFECT OF THE USE ON THE POTENTIAL MARKET FOR, OR VALUE OF, > THE COPYRIGHTED WORK I stand corrected. It is my understanding that non-profit use does not provide a general exemption to redistribute copyrighted material without permission. - murr - From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 9 06:50:47 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id GAA02163; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 06:30:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail01a.rapidsite.net (ip230.hway.net [207.158.192.230]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id GAA02155 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 06:30:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.jadebox.com (207.158.243.143) by mail01a.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.57s) with SMTP id 02657007 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 09:31:27 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <000d01bfd217$01ee04c0$63bbf1d1@mail3.tacintel.com> From: "Roger Smith" To: Subject: Fw: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 09:31:22 -0400 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 4.72.2120.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0 X-Loop-Detect: 1 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >u r incorrect when you state that profit has nothing to do with fair >use. > >fair use balances 4 elements: > > 1 the purpose and character of the use. > 2 the nature of the copyrighted work. > 3 the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to > the copyrighted work as a whole. > 4 THE EFFECT OF THE USE ON THE POTENTIAL MARKET FOR, OR VALUE OF, > THE COPYRIGHTED WORK > >element 4 is most definitely concerned with profit:) > >if u r interested in studying the issue more see title 17 United States >Codes 101 et.seq.. (the section u write on is 107). u might find it >helpful to use www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html You're ("u r") right. I think the confusion is because many people think that you can use a copyrighted work in any way you wish as long as you, yourself, don't profit from it. That's wrong, of course, as your citation points out. Since a message is automatically copyrighted by the person who creates it, you technically should have permission before posting it somewhere else. It's also a matter of courtesy to ask. I ask permission unless the message is obviously something the sender wants to have spread around (such as a press release). -- Roger The Guardians Safety Game: http://www.safetygame.com Teach Your Children to Think Safe! From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 9 07:42:59 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA02727; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 07:33:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ripco.com (pop2a.ripco.com [209.100.227.25]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id HAA02720 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 07:33:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by ripco.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA25561 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 09:37:09 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <200006091437.JAA25561@ripco.com> Subject: Re: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 09:37:09 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <20000608230322.173EC7C37@yellow.rahul.net> from "Michelle Dick" at Jun 08, 2000 04:03:22 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Michelle Dick wrote, | I always welcome requests to repost my posts to other email lists, and | almost always say yes. So do I, but I frequently find that what I wrote for one venue needs to be tweaked slightly to suit the place where the person wants to repost it (for example, because the context of earlier posts in the thread in the original forum would be unknown there), so more often than not I make some small changes to it and ask the reposter to use the modified version. That's yet another reason to consult with the author first. From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 9 10:47:54 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA04422; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 10:21:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toocan.com (adsl-63-203-59-66.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.203.59.66]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id KAA04414 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 10:21:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ar@localhost) by toocan.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA08141; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 10:22:55 -0700 Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 10:22:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Ash To: Roger Smith cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Fw: Netiquette: forwarding things to other forums In-Reply-To: <000d01bfd217$01ee04c0$63bbf1d1@mail3.tacintel.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk hi roger, i also follow your point - when in doubt ask - courtesy and respect for individuals cannot hurt:) Mike Godwin (general counsel for the Electronic Frontier Foundation) makes exactly your points (and more) in his book CyberRights:Defending Free Speech in the Digital Age (approximately page 200 - section on avoiding copyright lawsuits) On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Roger Smith wrote: > >u r incorrect when you state that profit has nothing to do with fair > >use. > > > >fair use balances 4 elements: > > > > 1 the purpose and character of the use. > > 2 the nature of the copyrighted work. > > 3 the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to > > the copyrighted work as a whole. > > 4 THE EFFECT OF THE USE ON THE POTENTIAL MARKET FOR, OR VALUE OF, > > THE COPYRIGHTED WORK > > > >element 4 is most definitely concerned with profit:) > > > >if u r interested in studying the issue more see title 17 United States > >Codes 101 et.seq.. (the section u write on is 107). u might find it > >helpful to use www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html > > You're ("u r") right. I think the confusion is because many people > think that you can use a copyrighted work in any way you wish as long as > you, yourself, don't profit from it. That's wrong, of course, as your > citation points out. > > Since a message is automatically copyrighted by the person who creates > it, you technically should have permission before posting it somewhere > else. It's also a matter of courtesy to ask. I ask permission unless > the message is obviously something the sender wants to have spread > around (such as a press release). > > -- Roger > The Guardians Safety Game: http://www.safetygame.com > Teach Your Children to Think Safe! > > > From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 14 22:49:03 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA07617; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 22:38:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id WAA07610 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 22:38:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5F5eKo26573 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 22:40:20 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 22:40:23 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Something folks probably ought to know about. above.net has (fairly recently, as far as I can tell), set up their networks to block any IP traffic to sites that are listed in the RBL. This has the side effect that any site downstream of them (I buy network from wombatnet, which buys network from above.net, for instance), is now controlled by the RBL, whether they want to be or not. Now while I support the RBL in theory, in practice, I have issues with it (because, among other things, I know of too many cases, including one I was indirectly involved in, where they tend to shoot first and ask questions when the lawyers call), and I don't run it on my machines. I now find it's irrelevant whether or not I run it; worse, if someone decides they want to "get" me, or any other downstream customer of above.net, they can attack us via the RBL. In fact, today I had to remote access into work to access a web site of a company to unsubscribe from a mailing list I was subscribed to at home, because the mailing list was on an RBLed site, and I couldn't access them via any protocol from home. I know that company pretty well, and it doesn't spam, except under very tight-@ss definitions of spam, but to put it bluntly, one or two tight-@ss can get you loaded into the RBL, and then you're in deep. Especially if you're downstream of above.net, and can't get to the RBL sites to find out what's going on or work on resolving it... Sites on the wrong side of this can literally be made to disappear without access to fix it. I'm not thrilled at this. I think blocking ALL traffic based on RBL data is excessive (I'd be unhappy if they blocked SMTP, but I can live with that), especially since the RBL is sometimes unreliable, and their definition of bad-stuff isn't universally accepted by a long shot. I've brought up these issues with my ISP, since I this is a well-intentioned wrong-think. I'm bringing it up here because I ran into it when subscribed members of my lists started having mail back up for no reason, and it took me a couple of days to track it down. Since above.net's fairly large and blocks traffic bi-directionally and unilaterally, it could be affecting everyone's delivery and mail queues as well. And if your main network routes through above.net, you're at risk of a complete blackout if someone decides to get you dumped into the RBL. Something you might want to be aware of, folks... This might be affecting you, and you don't know it. Which isn't a big deal if you support the RBL yourself, but if you don't, you may find that you are and didn't realize it. chuq -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 00:18:31 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id XAA08237; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 23:58:27 -0700 (PDT) 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 XAA08230 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 23:58:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 15671 invoked by uid 50); 15 Jun 2000 07:00:53 -0000 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. References: In-Reply-To: Chuq Von Rospach's message of "Wed, 14 Jun 2000 22:40:23 -0700" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 15 Jun 2000 00:00:53 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 37 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chuq Von Rospach writes: > above.net has (fairly recently, as far as I can tell), set up their > networks to block any IP traffic to sites that are listed in the RBL. Hasn't this been the case for eons? I thought above.net was one of the very early subscribers to the RBL BGP feed. I don't believe this is anything new. > In fact, today I had to remote access into work to access a web site of > a company to unsubscribe from a mailing list I was subscribed to at > home, because the mailing list was on an RBLed site, and I couldn't > access them via any protocol from home. I know that company pretty well, > and it doesn't spam, except under very tight-@ss definitions of spam, > but to put it bluntly, one or two tight-@ss can get you loaded into the > RBL, and then you're in deep. Have you contacted the RBL folks and asked why that site is listed, or are you speculating? In my experience, they're incredibly conservative about who they're willing to list. > I'm not thrilled at this. I think blocking ALL traffic based on RBL data > is excessive (I'd be unhappy if they blocked SMTP, but I can live with > that), especially since the RBL is sometimes unreliable, and their > definition of bad-stuff isn't universally accepted by a long shot. I've > brought up these issues with my ISP, since I this is a well-intentioned > wrong-think. I personally consider it a very significant feature offered by above.net, and for this reason I would actively seek out connectivity via above.net rather than other providers because of this policy (as well as other, very intelligent policies that they've set about spam and network abuse). So opinions differ here, predictably. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 01:48:36 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id BAA10156; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 01:31:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (236.dsl9226.rcsis.com [63.92.26.236]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id BAA10149 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 01:30:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.monkeys.com (localhost.monkeys.com [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with SMTP id e5F8SSI57301 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 01:28:28 -0700 (PDT) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 14 Jun 2000 22:40:23 -0700. Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 01:28:28 -0700 Message-ID: <57299.961057708@segfault.monkeys.com> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >Now while I support the RBL in theory, in practice, I have issues >with it (because, among other things, I know of too many cases, >including one I was indirectly involved in, where they tend to shoot >first and ask questions when the lawyers call), and I don't run it on >my machines. I now find it's irrelevant whether or not I run it; >worse, if someone decides they want to "get" me, or any other >downstream customer of above.net, they can attack us via the RBL. > >In fact, today I had to remote access into work to access a web site >of a company to unsubscribe from a mailing list I was subscribed to >at home, because the mailing list was on an RBLed site, and I >couldn't access them via any protocol from home. I know that company >pretty well, and it doesn't spam, except under very tight-@ss >definitions of spam, but to put it bluntly, one or two tight-@ss can >get you loaded into the RBL... Whatsa matter Chuq? Did some of your pals who are just as obstinate as you about refusing to secure their mailing lists run up against this? http://www.mail-abuse.org/rbl/candidacy.html#OriginationNow >... The opt-out approach violates our fundamental principle: >all communications must be consensual. > >This fundamental principle is sometimes violated by mailing >lists with inadequate confirmation or verification steps. >Mailing lists lacking a subscription confirmation step can >be used to send unsolicited mass e-mail to unwilling recipients. >A mailing list should include only those who have explicitly >indicated an interest in receiving messages from the list. > >Prudent mailing list management mandates verification of all >subscription requests before mailings commence. Many well- >meaning list managers have found themselves in the spamming >business when they don't confirm subscriptions. Please review >Basic Mailing List Management Principles for Preventing Abuse >for additional expectations and best current practices regarding >proper mailing list management. When are you going to get it through your thick skull that if Company XYZ spams me and then says ``Oh gosh! We're sorry! Somebody ELSE must have signed you up maliciously via our web site.'' there is quite simply NO WAY for me or anyone else... other that the company itself... to determine reliably if this statement/excuse, offered by the company, is a lie or not? REAL spammers say this exact thing ALL OF THE TIME. But when YOU say it, I and the other people you've spammed are just supposed to blindly believe it, right? What you don't understand, and what you apparently will NEVER understand, is that from THIS side of the wire, what the REAL spammers have told me, repeatedly, (i.e. "not our fault") and what you, and Apple have told me when YOU and Apple spammed me are EXACTLY identical, AND that I have no more reason to believe it when Apple says it than I do when any ordinary garden variety sleezbag selling XXX porno or swamp land in Florida says it. Give me one good reason why I should believe that when Apple spammed me recently it WASN'T just an intentional, premeditated, and concious spamming of my mailbox on the part of Apple. Just one. You can't do it. All you can say is ``Oh Apple is a Big and Reputable company, and we would never do THAT!'' But how do *I* know you would never do that? How can I possibly know to a 100% certainty that some new-hire clown in Apple's marketing department wouldn't think to himself one day ``Hey! I can use the Internet and just blast out this message to EVERYBODY!'' The answer is clear. I certainly DO NOT have any way of knowing for sure if your lame excuses that ``Oh gee! Some malicious person must have forged your e-mail address onto our web site signup form!'' are really truthful or not. Apple certainly WOULD NOT be the first large or well-known company to try dipping their big toe into the spamming cesspool. You just object to the fact that on the Internet now, because of spamming and other such shenanigans, people and companies are now being held *accountable* for what they do and how they do it, AND it is clear that you aren't happy that that you, Apple, IBM, Intel, General Motors, Proctor & Gamble, and the rest of the Fortune 500 are ALL being held to the SAME single standard as we now hold the real out-and-out low-life slug spammers to... i.e. no mail without PERMISSION. And why does this make you unhappy? Because you think that you're better than everybody else. You're the worst sort of elitist snob. You think that you, and Apple, and your other greedy and self-serving pals at other sites who, like you, are also running mailing lists with- out any confirmation on them, should be exempt from the general rules now being applied to everybody else. Why? Because you're "special". Get over yourself. You're not that special. In fact, as far as MY mailbox is concerned, you and Apple are just as bad as any other spammers. You place YOUR short term revenue well above MY privacy in your list of priorities, and thus, you run your mailing lists wide open, thus denying any objective independent outside observer any clear basis on which to determine if you/Apple are just plain spamming or not. You don't want the rest of the world to be able to clearly detemine if you/Apple are spamming or not. OK. Fine. Given that, I, and other people that you have sent unsolicited commercial mail to have every right to just throw up our hands and say that any commercial mail that Apple sends, without being requested, is, by default, "spam", and that we can reach no other conclusion that this because YOU have made it impossible to reach any other conclusion. If you had up-front confirmation on your lists, and if then, Apple just started sending me jizz out of the blue... as you did recently... then I would know to a 100% certainty that somebody at Apple was spamming. And conversely, if you could produce an associated confirmation that I sent in, explicitly ASKING to be on your list, then I would know that Apple WASN'T spamming. But because of your intentional LACK of con- firmation on your mailing lists, all I have is a strong and reasonable _suspicion_ that Apple has engaged in spamming... a suspicion which NOBDOY can either prove or dispove to a 100% certainty. YOU intentionally setup this situation in which Apple's spamming can neither be 100% proven nor 100% disproven (via your mailing list admin policies), and given that, you should expect people to take note of your deliberate obfsucation of the facts and to conclude that Apple really doesn't want anybody to know for sure if Apple is spamming or not. And if Apple wants that, it can only be because Apple *is* spamming. In short, YOU are responsible for it if people logically conclude that Apple *is* spamming. In short, you made your bed. Now lie in it. >... and then you're in deep. Especially if >you're downstream of above.net, and can't get to the RBL sites to >find out what's going on or work on resolving it... Sites on the >wrong side of this can literally be made to disappear without access >to fix it. Apparently you haven't heard yet, so let me be the first to tell you. There's this fellow named "Bell". He's invented this wonderful new gaget that allows you to speak into a box and actually have someone at some remote and perhaps distant location HEAR your voice, which is transmitted via electrical signals over copper wire. Look into it. (You might also want to investigate this new-fangled thing called a WHOIS server that allows you to find the contact phone numbers for other Internet sites. DUH!) >I'm not thrilled at this. I think blocking ALL traffic based on RBL >data is excessive (I'd be unhappy if they blocked SMTP, but I can >live with that), especially since the RBL is sometimes unreliable, Objection. Heresay evidence. Please confine your comments to the facts. >and their definition of bad-stuff isn't universally accepted... That's 100% true. An awful lot of people, myself included, feel that the MAPS people are far far too lenient in the way they often let Fortune 1000 companies off without any disiplinary action, even when they (the companies) are doing stuff that many netizens consider to be "bad stuff". >I'm bringing it up here because I ran into it when subscribed members >of my lists started having mail back up for no reason... "Subscribed members" like me for example?? What exactly do you want... a signed affidavit saying that I *never* asked to be on any of the several Apple mailing lists that you allowed me to be added to without my request or consent? -- rfg From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 07:12:38 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA15020; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 07:06:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gsp.org (rsk.tidalwave.com [208.211.3.21]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id HAA15012 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 07:06:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsk@localhost) by gsp.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA14294 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:10:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:10:26 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Message-ID: <20000615101026.A14248@gsp.org> References: <57299.961057708@segfault.monkeys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <57299.961057708@segfault.monkeys.com>; from rfg@monkeys.com on Thu, Jun 15, 2000 at 01:28:28AM -0700 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Y'know, it's not often that I agree with Ron -- and I've toasted him more than once on Spam-L when I didn't. But this time I have to agree with him: there is NO acceptable excuse for running any kind of mailing list that doesn't employ verification. Is it hard? Possibly. Is it confusing to users? Maybe. Is it more work? Probably. Does it have to be done? Absolutely. And in some ways, that's too bad, because in the days before spammers and pranksters were so prevalent, it wasn't necessary. Abuses were few and far between, and could be dealt with as they happened. But thanks to the tolerance for spam/abuse exhibited by many of those who either (a) don't care or (b) put profits ahead of ethics, it's a different 'net, and, well, for the moment at least, we're stuck with it. And just like we can't have world-writable FTP archives or world-mountable NFS volumes without opening the door for all kinds of trouble, we can't have non-verified mailing lists. As to the RBL, my experience is that they're quite picky and that it's rather difficult to get a site listed -- as it should be. I do wish, though, that they would provide an always-accessible email address so that it's not necessary to call them. (Voice communications are difficult for those of us with hearing problems.) ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk@gsp.org From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 08:10:28 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id IAA15612; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 08:05:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id IAA15605 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 08:05:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [165.227.249.13] (ip13.proper.com [165.227.249.13]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA24893; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 08:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: phoffman@mail.imc.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 08:07:38 -0700 To: Chuq Von Rospach , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Paul Hoffman / IMC Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 10:40 PM -0700 6/14/00, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >above.net has (fairly recently, as far as I can tell), Russ is right: it has been true for a long time. As someone who now colocates at above.net, I was pretty surprised when I heard about this recently, given that I've been at above.net for nine months. The fact that they use the RBL isn't mentioned anywhere in my colo contact, but it is mentioned in the text of one of the URLs in the contract. Having said that, I still don't know how I feel about it. On the one hand, like Chuq, I wouldn't choose to use the RBL, and even briefly considered leaving above.net when I found out that it was being forced on me. On the other hand, it hasn't caused us any noticeable problems that I know of. Unlike most companies on the web, we list our telephone number and postal address on hour home page, so someone who was aggrieved by us blocking them would be able to let us know fairly easily. We moved from a non-RBL colo site to above.net about nine months ago, so anyone who had been able to get to use before but couldn't now would have had plenty of time to tell us. So far, nothing. The only way I found out about it was hearing the MAPS folk talk about above.net. I also note that, being at above.net hasn't caused that much less spam from getting to IMC mailing lists. When we added DULS checking to our sendmail setup, the spam dropped noticeably, but we still get enough on some mailing lists to elicit complaints. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 10:40:35 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA17217; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:35:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id KAA17205 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:34:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA40598 ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:38:30 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:35:19 -0700 To: Paul Hoffman / IMC , Chuq Von Rospach , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 8:07 AM -0700 6/15/2000, Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote: >At 10:40 PM -0700 6/14/00, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >>above.net has (fairly recently, as far as I can tell), > >Russ is right: it has been true for a long time. Yes, someone from above.net popped in and let me know. It was a combination of both bigfoot and mailcity getting RBLed that made me go snoop the network connections -- so at one level, since it took this long to notice, it's not a big issue. On the other hand, I still prefer to make this decision for myself. On the other hand, I support what the RBL is trying to do, even though, on the other, other hand, they sometimes make mistakes. I just don't want to be one of those mistakes, especially if it means I can't get through above.net to find out what's gone on and try to get it resolved..... And, like Paul, if it's cutting down my spam, I sure don't notice. So much spam is being relayed from offshore now it's not funny, and there are so many open relays out there... >Having said that, I still don't know how I feel about it. Since it's been around for such a long time without me realizing it before now, that pretty much means that in practice, it's not a significant issue, so I won't worry about it, at least for now. I still think blocking ALL IP is overkill and could create problems, but at this point, I'll define it as net-neutral and keep an eye on it. >Unlike most companies on the web, we list our telephone number and >postal address on hour home page, so someone who was aggrieved by us >blocking them would be able to let us know fairly easily. I do, also, although I'm taking the phone number off. I've just had too many cold calls recently from people trying to sell me advertising for my web site, or to have me buy advertising from my site. I get tired of clueless sales droids, and if there's a technical problem, someone with half a clue can find out how to get ahold of me via NIC records. >I also note that, being at above.net hasn't caused that much less >spam from getting to IMC mailing lists. When we added DULS checking >to our sendmail setup, the spam dropped noticeably, but we still get >enough on some mailing lists to elicit complaints. DULS? I know I know that acronym, but I'm hitting a blank. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 12:25:28 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA18158; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:10:10 -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 MAA18151 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:10:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 25610 invoked by uid 100); 15 Jun 2000 15:12:42 -0400 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 15:12:42 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Chuq Von Rospach cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I still think blocking ALL IP is overkill and could create problems, But Chuq, blocking all IPs is SUPPOSED to create problems, and gives the RBL much of its effectiveness. This is particularly true for places like iBill who provide credit card service for porngraphers (an entirely legit service for the many legit pornographers) but would never have kicked off spamming customers without the pressure from loss of connectivity to their web site. 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 Jun 15 12:40:29 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA18142; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:08:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ripco.com (pop2a.ripco.com [209.100.227.25]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA18135 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:08:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ripco.com (root@golden.ripco.com [209.100.227.10]) by ripco.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA07355 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:12:00 -0500 (CDT) Received: by ripco.com (Smail #1) id m132f3b-000IRHC; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:12:03 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: From: dattier@ripco.com (David W. Tamkin) Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:12:02 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <20000615101026.A14248@gsp.org> from "Rich Kulawiec" at Jun 15, 2000 10:10:26 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Rich Kulawiec wrote, | I do wish, though, that they would provide an always-accessible | email address so that it's not necessary to call them. (Voice | communications are difficult for those of us with hearing problems.) I made the same suggestion to Paul Vixie concerning contact from admins of sites that wanted to get off (by proving that they'd been listed incorrectly or that they'd closed their open relay), and he dismissed it by saying that such an address "would just get spammed." From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 14:03:44 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA19100; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 13:42:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id NAA19093 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 13:42:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA58838 ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 13:46:26 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 13:44:28 -0700 To: dattier@ripco.com (David W. Tamkin) From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 2:12 PM -0500 6/15/2000, David W. Tamkin wrote: >I made the same suggestion to Paul Vixie concerning contact from admins of >sites that wanted to get off (by proving that they'd been listed incorrectly >or that they'd closed their open relay), and he dismissed it by saying that >such an address "would just get spammed." Ya know, I get ripped here at times for not doing the mailback-validate on every piece of email in the universe -- but on *my* systems, there's always a human being available to resolve problems that come up. where's the moral high ground here? If my system screws up (and what system is perfect), there's a body there to fix it. And the impact of my system screwing up is a lot less than the RBL's. and, FWIW, my mailbox gets spammed, too. That's part of doing business -- and the accessibility to solve problems that were created via my site far outweighs the inconvenience of dealing with the spam that mailbox generates. IMHO, you can't have it both ways. If you are going to impact other people, you need to be accessible to resolve problems. I do. why doesn't RBL? -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 14:33:32 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA19635; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:21:42 -0700 (PDT) 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 OAA19628 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:21:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 19878 invoked by uid 50); 15 Jun 2000 21:24:16 -0000 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. References: In-Reply-To: dattier@ripco.com's message of "Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:12:02 -0500 (CDT)" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 15 Jun 2000 14:24:16 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 19 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk David W Tamkin writes: > I made the same suggestion to Paul Vixie concerning contact from admins > of sites that wanted to get off (by proving that they'd been listed > incorrectly or that they'd closed their open relay), and he dismissed it > by saying that such an address "would just get spammed." To be fair to Paul's position there, the spam in question would be more like mailbombing. If there were a significant public contact address for the RBL team, don't you think that every vindictive spammer in existence would forge it as their return address, mailbomb it, mailbomb it by proxy from test autoresponders, put it on every address list, etc.? The ones who are doing this out of spite more than to make money in particular. I'd be very surprised if such an address stayed particularly useable for long. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 15:06:00 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA19870; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:38:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id OAA19863 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:38:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA38692 ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:43:00 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:34:42 -0700 To: Paul Hoffman / IMC , Chuq Von Rospach , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >Another excellent service from the MAPS folks. See >. > thanks! Now I remember. Yes, that's a good one. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 15:19:46 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA19767; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:30:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id OAA19752 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:30:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [165.227.249.13] (ip13.proper.com [165.227.249.13]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA04370; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:33:10 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: phoffman@mail.imc.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:32:48 -0700 To: Chuq Von Rospach , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Paul Hoffman / IMC Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 10:35 AM -0700 6/15/00, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >>I also note that, being at above.net hasn't caused that much less >>spam from getting to IMC mailing lists. When we added DULS checking >>to our sendmail setup, the spam dropped noticeably, but we still >>get enough on some mailing lists to elicit complaints. > >DULS? I know I know that acronym, but I'm hitting a blank. Another excellent service from the MAPS folks. See . --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 15:34:44 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA20300; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 15:10:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hostigos.otherwhen.com ([63.103.205.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA20287 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 15:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.otherwhen.com ([63.103.205.4]) by hostigos.otherwhen.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA01725 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 16:12:55 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from mavery@mail.otherwhen.com) Received: from PORKY/SpoolDir by mail.otherwhen.com (Mercury 1.48); 15 Jun 00 16:12:54 -0600 Received: from SpoolDir by PORKY (Mercury 1.48); 15 Jun 00 16:12:26 -0600 From: "Mike Avery" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 16:12:24 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Reply-to: mavery@mail.otherwhen.com Message-ID: <39490067.18302.7AD2B@localhost> In-reply-to: References: <20000615101026.A14248@gsp.org> from "Rich Kulawiec" at Jun 15, 2000 10:10:26 AM X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 15 Jun 2000, at 14:12, David W. Tamkin wrote: > Rich Kulawiec wrote, > | I do wish, though, that they would provide an always-accessible | > email address so that it's not necessary to call them. (Voice | > communications are difficult for those of us with hearing problems.) > I made the same suggestion to Paul Vixie concerning contact from > admins of sites that wanted to get off (by proving that they'd been > listed incorrectly or that they'd closed their open relay), and he > dismissed it by saying that such an address "would just get spammed." It's not a REAL problem, just a REAL nuisance. There are a number of shops on the net that provide free email. One that I've liked has been mailandnews.com You can use them with POP3, IMAP, or web interfaces, and they are anti-spam. So... if you're stuck, surf over to www.mailandnews.com and setup an account. Mike -- Mike Avery MAvery@mail.otherwhen.com (970)-642-0282 ICQ: 16241692 * Spam is for lusers who can't get business any other way * A Randomly Selected Thought For The Day: Elvis isn't dead he's waiting for COMPSURF to finish! From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 15:49:06 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA19735; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:29:08 -0700 (PDT) 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 OAA19728 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:29:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 19917 invoked by uid 50); 15 Jun 2000 21:31:42 -0000 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. References: In-Reply-To: Chuq Von Rospach's message of "Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:35:19 -0700" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 15 Jun 2000 14:31:42 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 45 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chuq Von Rospach writes: > And, like Paul, if it's cutting down my spam, I sure don't notice. So > much spam is being relayed from offshore now it's not funny, and there > are so many open relays out there... The RBL really doesn't cut down day-to-day spam. RSS or DUL are much better for that. The RBL is the big stick that's used to *keep* major organizations from spamming. It's real impact is far more preventative. I think it's been fairly effective at that, helped a lot by the large sites that use the BGP feed. Note that nearly all spammers are still bottom-feeding sorts of scum, get-rich-quick schemes bounced off off-shore relays. I really do believe that without the RBL, at least a few major US corporations would have tried their hand at large-scale spamming as marketing by now, and that really hasn't happened to any particularly significant degree. > Since it's been around for such a long time without me realizing it > before now, that pretty much means that in practice, it's not a > significant issue, so I won't worry about it, at least for now. Yeah, that's what I'd definitely recommend. > I still think blocking ALL IP is overkill and could create problems, but > at this point, I'll define it as net-neutral and keep an eye on it. It makes sense when you realize that the purpose of the RBL isn't to filter spam. It's not just another way to "press delete"; it's intended to do punative damage to the originating site. That's part of what makes it effective at stopping problems from starting rather than just cleaning up after them. > DULS? I know I know that acronym, but I'm hitting a blank. The DUL is an RBL-style black list that lists the dialup blocks of major providers. It's used to prevent direct spamming from trial or throwaway dialup accounts. (It also prevents people from sending mail directly from their Linux boxes at home, so some people, including me, who aren't fond of the new requirement that everyone who isn't an ISP has to use a relay mail server are not particularly fond of it, but it is effective at stopping a fairly large class of spam.) -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 16:34:21 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA20956; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 16:11:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from castro.queernet.org (castro.queernet.org [209.157.101.253]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id QAA20949 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 16:11:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (rogerk@localhost) by castro.queernet.org (8.10.0.Beta6/8.10.0.Beta6) with ESMTP id e5FNEIw04517 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 16:14:17 -0700 (PDT) From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" To: John R Levine cc: Chuq Von Rospach , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. 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, 15 Jun 2000, John R Levine wrote: > But Chuq, blocking all IPs is SUPPOSED to create problems, and gives the RBL > much of its effectiveness. This is particularly true for places like iBill > who provide credit card service for porngraphers (an entirely legit service > for the many legit pornographers) but would never have kicked off spamming > customers without the pressure from loss of connectivity to their web site. Why is this any of their business, other than as a personal moral concern? Should we next start blocking mail from supermarkets that sell food to spammers? -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE rogerk@QueerNet.ORG urgent: rogerk-page@QueerNet.ORG PO Box 14309 San Francisco, CA 94114 +1 415 ALL-ARFF "There is only one real blasphemy -- the refusal of joy!" -- Paul Rudnick From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 16:48:30 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA20732; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 15:59:21 -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 PAA20724 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 15:59:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by smtp2.vnet.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5FN1rI04047 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 19:01:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA20099 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 19:01:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 19:01:53 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. 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, 15 Jun 2000, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > Ya know, I get ripped here at times for not doing the > mailback-validate on every piece of email in the universe -- > but on *my* systems, there's always a human being available > to resolve problems that come up. You excel at producing pure hyperbole. No one has suggested that you validate "every piece of email in the universe." One simple validation per $ubscription request will suffice. Validation can be done automatically by most mailing list management programs. I'm glad that human beings are available on *your* systems to handle problems. Note that human assistance is available on *most* mailing lists. However, most mailing lists don't actively solicit the problems caused by unvalidated $ubscriptions. > where's the moral high ground here? If my system screws up > (and what system is perfect), there's a body there to fix it. > And the impact of my system screwing up is a lot less than > the RBL's. If you make no effort to validate, your system is screwed up by design. You choose not to fix the problem therefore you have no claim to the high moral ground. - murr - From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 18:48:33 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA22678; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:29:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.xnet.com (quake.xnet.com [198.147.221.67]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA22671 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:29:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.243.156.212] (adamb.xnet.com [205.243.156.212]) by mail.xnet.com (8.9.3+Sun/XNet-3.0R) with SMTP id UAA27165 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 20:31:53 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <200006160131.UAA27165@mail.xnet.com> Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 20:31:54 -0500 x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: Adam Bailey To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 6/15/00 9:10 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote... >Y'know, it's not often that I agree with Ron -- and I've toasted him >more than once on Spam-L when I didn't. But this time I have to >agree with him: there is NO acceptable excuse for running any kind >of mailing list that doesn't employ verification. Must we start this again? From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 19:04:00 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA22688; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:29:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ripco.com (pop2b.ripco.com [209.100.227.27]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA22680 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:29:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ripco.com (root@foley.ripco.com [209.100.227.6]) by ripco.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA11397 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 20:33:13 -0500 (CDT) Received: by ripco.com (Smail #1) id m132l0b-000Ko7C; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 20:33:21 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: From: dattier@ripco.com (David W. Tamkin) Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 20:33:20 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <39490067.18302.7AD2B@localhost> from "Mike Avery" at Jun 15, 2000 04:12:24 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Russ Allbery wrote, | To be fair to Paul's position there, the spam in question would be more | like mailbombing. If there were a significant public contact address for | the RBL team, don't you think that every vindictive spammer in existence | would forge it as their return address, mailbomb it, mailbomb it by proxy | from test autoresponders, put it on every address list, etc.? The ones | who are doing this out of spite more than to make money in particular. | I'd be very surprised if such an address stayed particularly useable for | long. Very good point, Russ, and good follow-through. Vixie said, however, that such an address "would just get spammed," not that it would get mailbombed, so I highly doubt that he thought it through as far as you did. The feeling I got from his wording was that nothing in the universe was worth letting a single slice of spam sully his server. Mike Avery wrote, > There are a number of shops on the net that provide free email. One that > I've liked has been mailandnews.com. You can use them with POP3, IMAP, or > web interfaces, and they are anti-spam. > So... if you're stuck, surf over to www.mailandnews.com and setup > an account. Mike, you're giving a year 2000 answer to a 1995 problem. When this corres- pondence took place, there were few such things as public webmail providers. I personally knew of none, and I had no HTTP access anyway (except by dialing into a shell account and using Lynx; ever try to use webmail through a text- only browser?). "Surf over"? I couldn't get to the beach then, much less out on the surf. Also, at the time I had no POP3 nor SMTP capability on my own machine, so public popmail providers, if any existed, would have been no help either. But didn't you notice that I somehow managed to correspond with the RBL people regardless? What helped was the account I had on another shell provider, who wasn't on the RBL. From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 21:19:47 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA24435; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:06:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id VAA24428 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5G48do29593 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:08:39 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:08:07 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: what timing... Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Interesting timing.... The fact that the test was run by the group that came out on top makes me immediately wonder, but... -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 21:33:37 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA24360; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:00:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id UAA24298 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 20:59:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5G42So29569; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:02:28 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 20:52:47 -0700 To: murr rhame , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >You excel at producing pure hyperbole. And results, too. But we'll ignore that. Off back under my rock, I guess. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 15 21:49:24 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA24385; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:00:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id VAA24318 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:00:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5G42To29572; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:02:29 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200006160131.UAA27165@mail.xnet.com> References: <200006160131.UAA27165@mail.xnet.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 20:59:36 -0700 To: Adam Bailey , From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 8:31 PM -0500 6/15/2000, Adam Bailey wrote: >Must we start this again? You can if you must, but count me out... Other than to say it's too bad some folks decided llong ago that one solution was the only possible solution, and haven't noticed that there have been many changes to reality since then that mimght make rethinking such overly-simplistic ideas worthwhile. But this is clearly not the forum where it can be rethought. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 16 00:49:02 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id AAA26405; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 00:30:31 -0700 (PDT) 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 AAA26393 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 00:30:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 21426 invoked by uid 50); 16 Jun 2000 07:33:06 -0000 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: what timing... References: In-Reply-To: Chuq Von Rospach's message of "Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:08:07 -0700" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 16 Jun 2000 00:33:06 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 27 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chuq Von Rospach writes: > Interesting timing.... > > The fact that the test was run by the group that came out on top makes > me immediately wonder, but... Brightmail is odd. I've never gotten a particularly good vibe from them. I'm in general very leery of commercial filtering services because in order to compete commercially they're pretty much out of necessity keeping their precise techniques secret, and that opens up more false positive risks and other related problems than I'd be comfortable with. Say what you want about MAPS, RSS, or even ORBS, at least they make very public exactly who they're blocking and for the most part why. I can go look at their databases and figure out whether or not a mail message would be blocked. They're also, from that article, again missing the point of the RBL. It would have been interesting to see RSS on that list, or ORBS, and it would also have been interesting to find out how they were generating the spam. Were they using real spam, or where they inventing it? -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 16 03:03:35 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id CAA28725; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 02:47:51 -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 CAA28718 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 02:47:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by smtp2.vnet.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5G9oOg18948; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 05:50:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id FAA04925; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 05:50:24 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 05:50:24 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: Chuq Von Rospach cc: Adam Bailey , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. 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, 15 Jun 2000, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > You can if you must, but count me out... Other than to say > it's too bad some folks decided llong ago that one solution > was the only possible solution, and haven't noticed that > there have been many changes to reality since then that > mimght make rethinking such overly-simplistic ideas > worthwhile. > > But this is clearly not the forum where it can be rethought. I'll bite. What are your new solutions to the problem of forged and other unwanted subscriptions? The quantity of abuse has grown worse with time. Your solution appears to be apologize and minimize after the damage is done then just wait for the next victim. If I've misread or misrepresented your unwanted subscription management strategy, please illuminate. - murr - From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 16 09:40:29 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA05156; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:39:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA05148 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:39:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [165.227.249.13] (ip13.proper.com [165.227.249.13]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA18484 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:42:49 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: phoffman@mail.imc.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:29:08 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Paul Hoffman / IMC Subject: Re: what timing... Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:33 AM -0700 6/16/00, Russ Allbery wrote: >Brightmail is odd. I've never gotten a particularly good vibe from them. >I'm in general very leery of commercial filtering services because in >order to compete commercially they're pretty much out of necessity keeping >their precise techniques secret, They describe their techniques in detail on their web site. See . > and that opens up more false positive >risks and other related problems than I'd be comfortable with. Brightmail puts all trapped spam in an easily-accessible folder so that the user (an end user or a sysadmin) can go through and look for false positives. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 16 10:10:29 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA05319; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:59:28 -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 JAA05312 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:59:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 15465 invoked by uid 100); 16 Jun 2000 13:02:09 -0400 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 13:02:09 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Russ Allbery cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: what timing... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Brightmail is odd. I've never gotten a particularly good vibe from them. > I'm in general very leery of commercial filtering services because in > order to compete commercially they're pretty much out of necessity keeping > their precise techniques secret, and that opens up more false positive > risks and other related problems than I'd be comfortable with. There's nothing particularly secret about Brightmail's approach -- they have a network of thousands of spam trap addresses feeding spam to live people on duty 24/7 tweaking their spam filters in real time. It's a fantastically expensive and labor-intensive approach to spam filtering, and the fact that it's economically viable should remind us of how serious the spam problem is. > They're also, from that article, again missing the point of the RBL. Right. As recently mentioned, the point of the RBL isn't to block today's spam, it's to prevent tomorrow's spam. 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 Jun 16 14:22:20 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA08021; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 14:06:13 -0700 (PDT) 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 OAA08014 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 14:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 24136 invoked by uid 50); 16 Jun 2000 21:08:56 -0000 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: what timing... References: In-Reply-To: Paul Hoffman / IMC's message of "Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:29:08 -0700" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 16 Jun 2000 14:08:56 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 37 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Paul Hoffman / IMC writes: > At 12:33 AM -0700 6/16/00, Russ Allbery wrote: >> Brightmail is odd. I've never gotten a particularly good vibe from >> them. I'm in general very leery of commercial filtering services >> because in order to compete commercially they're pretty much out of >> necessity keeping their precise techniques secret, > They describe their techniques in detail on their web site. See > . I beg to differ. Their web site says, essentially, that they look at spam and write rules to block it. Well, yes. Duh. What rules do they write? Can I get a full list of all of their current rules? I've not asked them for this, so perhaps I'm wrong, but it would really surprise me if they were willing to post such a list on their web site. I can get all the rules used by, say, MAPS. > Brightmail puts all trapped spam in an easily-accessible folder so that > the user (an end user or a sysadmin) can go through and look for false > positives. Yes, all the commercial spam filters do this (to my knowledge). But I think this is fundamentally a bit of a cop-out; if I have to sort through all the trapped spam, I may as well just get all the spam in my mailbox in the first place. :) If there's any real utility to the filtering, then stuff that gets filtered out is going to be "less seen" in some fashion than stuff that isn't, which raises the possibility of false positives. But then, I personally am pretty paranoid about false positives; I know that a lot of average computer users seem to routinely put up with levels of e-mail loss that I'd consider completely unacceptable. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Sat Jun 17 04:10:42 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id EAA17944; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 04:01:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail44.fg.online.no (mail44-s.fg.online.no [148.122.161.44]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id EAA17937 for ; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 04:00:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from a2 (ti08a21-0119.dialup.online.no [130.67.34.119]) by mail44.fg.online.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA27868 for ; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 13:03:50 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <200006171103.NAA27868@mail44.fg.online.no> From: "Annie" Organization: Geocities To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 13:17:09 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Spam from my own address Reply-to: nacelebs@online.no X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi guys, I received a piece of spam today that was addressed FROM my own address! I'm hoping they have software that puts the from address to the current addressee, and not my address on every piece of spam!!!!!! Any ideas on what they're doing and why? It's an old Geocities address that's about to expire, but even so... Regards From list-managers-owner Sat Jun 17 14:06:05 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA23249; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 13:45:44 -0700 (PDT) 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 NAA23242 for ; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 13:45:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 920 invoked by uid 50); 17 Jun 2000 20:48:37 -0000 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Spam from my own address References: <200006171103.NAA27868@mail44.fg.online.no> In-Reply-To: "Annie"'s message of "Sat, 17 Jun 2000 13:17:09 +0200" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 17 Jun 2000 13:48:37 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 18 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Annie writes: > I received a piece of spam today that was addressed FROM my own address! > I'm hoping they have software that puts the from address to the current > addressee, and not my address on every piece of spam!!!!!! Chances are high that it's the former. It's a not-uncommon technique. > Any ideas on what they're doing and why? It's an old Geocities address > that's about to expire, but even so... It's intended to get around spam filters that do weak envelope or From header filtering; the spammer is guaranteed that the address to which they're sending mail will be seen by the recipient system as a valid and resolving e-mail address. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 20 21:24:27 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA11088; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:06:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.postmodern.com (server.postmodern.com [216.240.39.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id VAA11080 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:06:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gsp.org (rsk.tidalwave.com [208.211.3.21]) by server.postmodern.com (8.8.5/mcb-980201) with ESMTP id DAA11585 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 03:30:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsk@localhost) by gsp.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA07507 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 06:30:24 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 06:30:22 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Message-ID: <20000620063021.A7502@gsp.org> References: <200006160131.UAA27165@mail.xnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from chuqui@plaidworks.com on Thu, Jun 15, 2000 at 08:59:36PM -0700 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, Jun 15, 2000 at 08:59:36PM -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > You can if you must, but count me out... Other than to say it's too > bad some folks decided llong ago that one solution was the only > possible solution, and haven't noticed that there have been many > changes to reality since then that mimght make rethinking such > overly-simplistic ideas worthwhile. And it's too bad that you can't address the idea itself, but instead paint its proponents as antiquated thinkers. Confirmation *works*. It works well. It scales. [*] It prevents some (but obviously not all) abuses. And at least with the s/w that I use to run mailing lists, it's trivial to implement. I also think taking "reasonable and customary" steps to prevent the resources I manage from being used to harrass other people is part of my responsibility. I don't believe that I can blithely shrug it off as if it isn't. ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk@gsp.org [*] Lack of confirmation does not scale. Consider what happens if jerk A decides to harrass user B by subscribing B to every mailing list A can find which lacks an acceptable confirmation mechanism. Oh, sure, site C may only have one mailing list which then begins shipping traffic to B; but site C may be only one of thousands with whom B must now correspond to straighten things out. This is, regretably, NOT a hypothetical case. From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 20 22:45:45 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA13178; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 22:36:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id WAA13169 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 22:36:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5L5dKo15438; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 22:39:20 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20000620063021.A7502@gsp.org> References: <200006160131.UAA27165@mail.xnet.com> <20000620063021.A7502@gsp.org> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 22:39:29 -0700 To: Rich Kulawiec , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 6:30 AM -0400 6/20/2000, Rich Kulawiec wrote: >And it's too bad that you can't address the idea itself, but instead >paint its proponents as antiquated thinkers. I've tried, Rich.I really have. But I can't have a conversation with people who won't talk to me. Instead, all I get back in return are lectures. >Confirmation *works*. It works well. It scales. [*] It prevents >some (but obviously not all) abuses. And at least with the >s/w that I use to run mailing lists, it's trivial to implement. and where have I ever said that's not true? If you accuse me of painting people as antiquated thinkers, what about those who insist on trying to define my arguments for me and then ripping me for how they interpret what I think? Frankly, I'm tired of trying. I decided that a couple of days ago, but I'll say more on that later. >I also think taking "reasonable and customary" steps to prevent >the resources I manage from being used to harrass other people is >part of my responsibility. I don't believe that I can blithely >shrug it off as if it isn't. So do I. >[*] Lack of confirmation does not scale. Baloney. But more on that later, too. I don't feel like flying off the handle on this issue now, and if I'm going to discuss this, I'm going to discuss it rationally and with thought. >This is, regretably, NOT a hypothetical case. No, it's not. and depending on the list, confirmation is a very appropriate response to the problem. But there are other alternatives that also work. But more on that later, when I have a chance to gather my thoughts and lay it out one final time. Not that i expect it to do anything more than start up the same old kneejerks again. (but here's a hint. The answer is not "confirmation". The answer is "well run mailing lists". confirmation is *a* tool, not *the* tool. And confirmation does you nothing if the mailing list is run badly. The trick is not to use confirmation, but to run mailing lists well. And confirmation is one tool in the arsenal, and not necessarily the right tool. It's definitely not the only tool) More later. but thanks for confirming my thoughts as correct. chuq -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 21 08:42:22 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id IAA22201; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 08:22:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ncar.UCAR.EDU (ncar.ucar.edu [192.52.106.6]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id IAA22194 for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 08:22:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200006211526.JAA07207@ncar.ucar.EDU> Received: (from woods@localhost) by ncar.UCAR.EDU (8.9.1a/) id JAA07207 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:26:24 -0600 (MDT) Subject: spam packet routing To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:26:24 -0600 (MDT) From: woods@ucar.edu (Greg Woods) 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 What's a "spam packet"? Very good question. About once a month or so, I get a complaint from someone about a spam, I look at the headers, and the message clearly did not originate from and never passed through any of our mail servers. So I write back to the complainant pointing this out, and the response is something like "well, I did a traceroute to the source and it passed through one of your routers". Ignoring for the moment the fact that routing on the Internet is dynamic and sometimes asymmetric, and this by itself doesn't prove that the spam packets actually did pass through our router, I'm curious to know how people on this list view this situation. Are we really expected to police every packet that goes through our routers just because we happen to be an interconnection point for several different networks, and therefore we route some IP traffic that neither originates nor terminates with us? What do these complainants really expect us to do? Do they think we should threaten to block all IP traffic from a given source just because they originated a spam? If so, is that a reasonable expectation even for the most radical anti-spammers? Are there any active blacklists out there that would put us on their list for this sort of thing? To me, this is like expecting the phone company to prevent illegal use of the phone system. I don't think this is a reasonable approach, and I would hate the kind of Internet that would be created if people were expected to do this kind of monitoring and traffic restriction at the IP level. What do the rest of you think? Anybody else in a similar position? --Greg From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 21 11:26:49 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA24008; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 11:03:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com ([63.92.26.236]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id LAA23999 for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 11:03:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA55350; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 11:01:44 -0700 (PDT) To: woods@ucar.edu (Greg Woods) cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: spam packet routing In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:26:24 -0600. <200006211526.JAA07207@ncar.ucar.EDU> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 11:01:44 -0700 Message-ID: <55348.961610504@monkeys.com> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <200006211526.JAA07207@ncar.ucar.EDU>, woods@ucar.edu (Greg Woods) wrote: >What's a "spam packet"? Very good question. > >About once a month or so, I get a complaint from someone about a spam, >I look at the headers, and the message clearly did not originate from >and never passed through any of our mail servers. So I write back to >the complainant pointing this out, and the response is something like >"well, I did a traceroute to the source and it passed through one of >your routers". Was that true? What was the source IP, exactly? Let's not talk in vague generalities. Let's talk specifics. Post the IP so that the rest of us can try doing traceroutes also. It may be enlightening. (I for one wasn't aware that NCAR gave connectivity to anybody except NCAR.) >Ignoring for the moment the fact that routing on the >Internet is dynamic and sometimes asymmetric, and this by itself >doesn't prove that the spam packets actually did pass through our >router, I'm curious to know how people on this list view this >situation. Are we really expected to police every packet that goes >through our routers just because we happen to be an interconnection >point for several different networks, and therefore we route some IP >traffic that neither originates nor terminates with us? Expected? Well, yes and no. Some people may ``expect'' that, but I personally only hope for it. Let's just say that it would be a Better World if everyone who provides bandwidth to spam sources would be somewhat more pro-active about its elimination. >What do these >complainants really expect us to do? Do they think we should threaten >to block all IP traffic from a given source just because they >originated a spam? Well... ummm... yea. That would be nice. NCAR is taxpayer supported. I are a taxpayer. I do not wish to have even 1/100th of 1% of my federal tax dollars spent in providing bandwidth to spammers. >If so, is that a reasonable expectation even for the >most radical anti-spammers? Expectation? No. Hope? Yes. >Are there any active blacklists out there >that would put us on their list for this sort of thing? The MAPS RBL has "blackholed" some fairly large organizations because they were repeatedly and persistantly providing connectivity to spammers. >To me, this is like expecting the phone company to prevent illegal use >of the phone system. No, that is a seriously flawed analogy. It is more like expecting the Village Elders to take a stick and whack the Village Idiot over the head when he gets drunk on a Saturday Night and then goes around trashing other nearby villiages. It's a tough job, but somebody's got to do it. (In case you haven't noticed, there are quite a lot of "Village Idiots" on the net these days.) >I don't think this is a reasonable approach, and I >would hate the kind of Internet that would be created if people were expected >to do this kind of monitoring and traffic restriction at the IP level. So you would prefer the kind of Internet where numerous Village Idiots are left to run rampant with no restraints whatsoever?? Yea! That's the ticket! And I guess we shouldn't whack the Idiots who try to plug their end of their cablemodem lines into a nearby 120V outlet either, right? After all, its a free country, right? The net only works when people behave themselves, when they follow the RFCs, etc., etc. When they don't, somebody has to be there to cut the wire. From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 21 16:12:00 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA27230; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 15:43:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ncar.UCAR.EDU (ncar.ucar.edu [192.52.106.6]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA27223 for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 15:43:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200006212246.QAA21883@ncar.ucar.EDU> Received: (from woods@localhost) by ncar.UCAR.EDU (8.9.1a/) id QAA21883; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 16:46:48 -0600 (MDT) Subject: Re: spam packet routing To: rfg@monkeys.com (Ronald F. Guilmette) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 16:46:48 -0600 (MDT) Cc: woods@ucar.edu, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <55348.961610504@monkeys.com> from "Ronald F. Guilmette" at Jun 21, 0 11:01:44 am From: woods@ucar.edu (Greg Woods) 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 > >"well, I did a traceroute to the source and it passed through one of > >your routers". > > Was that true? I have no idea, I only have the complainant's word for it. But I was assuming here that his traceroute to the spam source did indeed show a router within our domain. > Post > the IP so that the rest of us can try doing traceroutes also. I no longer have it. I'm not sure I *ever* had it. All I had was the headers from the offending spam that the complainant sent me. They didn't show any of our servers, so it was clear to me that there wasn't anything I could reasonably do about it. > (I for one wasn't aware that NCAR gave connectivity > to anybody except NCAR.) We belong to a number of cooperative research networks, such as Abilene, the vBNS, Front Range GigaPop (FRGP), etc. The purpose of these is either to provide high speed connectivity between academic and research institutions, or to share the cost of a high bandwidth commodity Internet hookup. Because NCAR was the first in the area to start this process, most of the links in to these various networks go through us. But a number of these links and routers are not even owned by us, they are owned collectively by organizations such as FRGP (and yes, I'm sure the FRGP has an acceptable use policy that would not permit any of its members to be spam houses). In addition to that, most of the links are redundant links, which means that even if we did block someone's access, it would hurt only us, by damaging our credibility with the other institutions we are cooperating with. It wouldn't even succeed in cutting off the source. > Let's just say that it would be a Better World if everyone who provides > bandwidth to spam sources would be somewhat more pro-active about its > elimination. This is an arguable point. I think it is conceivable that, if places like NCAR were forced to police the content of IP packets routed through here, that the cure could be worse than the disease. NCAR does not have the resources to do this, so if there were ever a requirement that we do so, a lot of these cooperative agreements would most likely end. I think this would be an extremely high price to pay. Think about what would happen if this were required of the backbone providers. This is like killing the host body to wipe out the germ. > NCAR is taxpayer supported. I are a taxpayer. I do not wish to have even > 1/100th of 1% of my federal tax dollars spent in providing bandwidth to > spammers. This argument at least means nothing. I too am a taxpayer, and the government does lots of things that I don't approve of and that I would rather they didn't spend a penny of my money on, but this argument doesn't seem to stop them. > The MAPS RBL has "blackholed" some fairly large organizations because they > were repeatedly and persistantly providing connectivity to spammers. This isn't quite the same thing. You are now referring to a consistent and demonstrable pattern. I was referring to a single incident. I think it's a waste of time to get traffic carriers involved at this stage. There isn't a chance in hell that any IP service provider is going to terminate or even threaten to terminate someone's access based on a single complaint or incident. The complaints at this stage should be directed to the actual source of the problem, where it can be fixed. That is all I am saying. > >To me, this is like expecting the phone company to prevent illegal use > >of the phone system. > > No, that is a seriously flawed analogy. > > It is more like expecting the Village Elders to take a stick and whack > the Village Idiot over the head when he gets drunk on a Saturday Night > and then goes around trashing other nearby villiages. No, it's not. It's like expecting our Village Elders to deal with the neighboring village's idiot for something he did to yet a third village, because he might have walked through our village on the way there. *His* village's elders should be handling that. Our Village Elders are quite willing to deal with our own idiots, and we have done so when we have had to (mostly cases of SMTP servers accidentally left open that were quickly closed when discovered). > So you would prefer the kind of Internet where numerous Village Idiots > are left to run rampant with no restraints whatsoever?? I certainly never said any such thing. What I am saying is that people realistically in a position to apply the restraints should be the ones to do so. --Greg From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 21 18:11:27 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA28405; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 17:50:41 -0700 (PDT) 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 RAA28398 for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 17:50:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 17611 invoked by uid 50); 22 Jun 2000 00:54:18 -0000 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: spam packet routing References: <55348.961610504@monkeys.com> In-Reply-To: "Ronald F. Guilmette"'s message of "Wed, 21 Jun 2000 11:01:44 -0700" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 21 Jun 2000 17:54:18 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 30 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Ronald F Guilmette writes: > Let's just say that it would be a Better World if everyone who provides > bandwidth to spam sources would be somewhat more pro-active about its > elimination. Sure, agreed. But at the same time, in general when peering with someone (whether at the IP layer or the application layer), there's some degree of mutual respect and ongoing relationship, and people have a right to police their own houses in a way that they consider appropriate (provided that the results are acceptable). The way I see it, there's a chain of appeal. The end-user provider, whether for the machine originating the spam, the machine relaying the spam, or the machine providing hosting services for the drop-box or web site, should be the first contact. If that first contact is ignored, then escalation to their upstream providers or peers may be appropriate. I'm not familiar with the intricacies of IP peering, but to take an example from an area that I am very familiar with (namely news peering), it annoys me to get complaints about spam originating at my peers when the person has clearly not even attempted to contact the originating site first directly (or is just cc'ing everyone in the Path header). If they can show that they've already contacted the other site and they didn't respond, then I might be able to do something, but otherwise the complaint is just going to get ignored (since I generally have some trust in the abuse desks of sites that I peer with). -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 07:16:55 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA07646; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 07:05:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ncar.UCAR.EDU (ncar.ucar.edu [192.52.106.6]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id HAA07639 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 07:05:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200006221409.IAA22237@ncar.ucar.EDU> Received: (from woods@localhost) by ncar.UCAR.EDU (8.9.1a/) id IAA22237; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 08:09:29 -0600 (MDT) Subject: Re: spam packet routing To: rfg@monkeys.com (Ronald F. Guilmette) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 08:09:29 -0600 (MDT) Cc: woods@ucar.edu, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <92894.961636689@monkeys.com> from "Ronald F. Guilmette" at Jun 21, 0 06:18:09 pm From: woods@ucar.edu (Greg Woods) 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 > There is obviously quite a lot that you are leaving out of this story. True, because I was asking a hypothetical question about a situation that I assumed was fairly common. I no longer have the particulars, I don't save every individual complaint I ever get (there aren't that many anyway). > That's pretty much the same excuse that the Swiss used during World War > II for why they continued to do business with Germany throughout the war. This will be my last posting in this thread, because I hereby invoke Godwin's Law. As soon as someone brings up Hitler and the Nazis, which is a totally ludicrous comparision, the thread has gone past the point where any rational discussion is likely and it's time to end it. > Did the person complaining already complain to > the local site that was originating the spam, and was that complaint > merely brushed off? What he apparently did, and I've seen this pattern a lot which is why I brought this up, was do a traceroute back to what he *thinks* is the source, and blast a complaint to postmaster at every domain that turns up in the traceroute. So the answer to your question here is no, he did not contact the originating site first. > As I said above, yes, the first level of complaint should always go to > the local organization... Well, this is certainly what I thought too. But this isn't how it sometimes happens, and that is what I was asking about. > I assume that all the organizations you connect directly > with are generally reputable research, academic, or commercial outfits.) Yes, although academic outfits do have village idiots who occasionally do things they shouldn't, either because they don't know any better or because they think they can get away with it. My point is only that it should be the academic institution in question who is asked to deal with this, not me. > So be a good chap Please do not be condescending. It makes rational discussion impossible (as does bringing up the Germans and WWII which has zero to do with this situation; there is no one involved who is comparable to them). --Greg From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 09:31:56 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA08757; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 09:16:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.rev.net (mail.rev.net [206.67.68.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA08750 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 09:16:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fantasy (USER3.GVA.NET [216.80.135.7]) by mail.rev.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e5MGK9l01948 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:20:10 -0400 Message-Id: <200006221620.e5MGK9l01948@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:19:59 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: spam packet routing In-reply-to: <200006221409.IAA22237@ncar.ucar.EDU> References: <92894.961636689@monkeys.com> from "Ronald F. Guilmette" at Jun 21, 0 06:18:09 pm X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 22 Jun 2000, at 8:09, Greg Woods wrote: > What he apparently did, and I've seen this pattern a lot which is why I > brought this up, was do a traceroute back to what he *thinks* is the > source, and blast a complaint to postmaster at every domain that turns > up in the traceroute. So the answer to your question here is no, he > did not contact the originating site first. This is almost certainly what happened. The thing is that the "moral outrage" of a lot of the spam-haters often exceeds their technical prowess, and so rather than work harder [or learn more!] so that they can really try to figure out whence the spam, they take the easier course: they try to find EVERY host that could _possibly_ have touched the messages [even obviously incorrect and bogus ones] and just complain to *EVERYBODY*. They figure that among _all_ of those folk *some* sysadmin will be the actual culprit... hassling other folk unnecessarily and inappropriately almost certainly doesn't register high on their list of concerns... We get occasional spam complaints with an incredible "laundry list" of [apparently random] hosts in the address list. In one case, we got a spam complaint because were were the domain-contact of one of the [forged!] host addresses in one of the header fields... /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 10:32:14 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA09282; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:18:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (236.dsl9226.rcsis.com [63.92.26.236]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id KAA09275 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:18:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA10265; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:16:57 -0700 (PDT) To: woods@ucar.edu (Greg Woods) cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: spam packet routing In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 22 Jun 2000 08:09:29 -0600. <200006221409.IAA22237@ncar.ucar.EDU> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:16:57 -0700 Message-ID: <10263.961694217@monkeys.com> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <200006221409.IAA22237@ncar.ucar.EDU>, woods@ucar.edu (Greg Woods) wrote: >> There is obviously quite a lot that you are leaving out of this story. > >True, because I was asking a hypothetical question about a situation that >I assumed was fairly common. I no longer have the particulars, I don't save >every individual complaint I ever get (there aren't that many anyway). > >> That's pretty much the same excuse that the Swiss used during World War >> II for why they continued to do business with Germany throughout the war. > >This will be my last posting in this thread, because I hereby invoke >Godwin's Law. As soon as someone brings up Hitler and the Nazis... I didn't. Read carefully. I only mentioned the Germans. > which is a totally ludicrous comparision, the thread has gone past the point >where any rational discussion is likely and it's time to end it. Is it ``irrational'' to say that at some point, and in some circumstances, one has to stand on principal, and not just ``go with the flow''? Because that was the only point I was making. >> Did the person complaining already complain to >> the local site that was originating the spam, and was that complaint >> merely brushed off? > >What he apparently did, and I've seen this pattern a lot which is why I >brought this up, was do a traceroute back to what he *thinks* is the >source, and blast a complaint to postmaster at every domain that turns >up in the traceroute. So the answer to your question here is no, he >did not contact the originating site first. Well, in that case, yes, he/she/it screwed up. And you would have been well justified to write back a rather terse note saying just ``Please contact the local postmaster about this in the first instances and only contact us if you are not able to obtain a satisfactory resolution after giving that local postmaster a reasonable amount of time to respond.'' >> I assume that all the organizations you connect directly >> with are generally reputable research, academic, or commercial outfits.) > >Yes, although academic outfits do have village idiots who occasionally >do things they shouldn't... Correct, but the local POSTMASTERS at the sites that NCAR is likely to have direct connections to are unlikely to condone such things, or to turn a blind eye to them, especially if those activities start genera- ting complaints. So again, I'm confirming what you believed in the first place... the complaints about these other sites SHOULD go to the local postmasters (and not to you) in the first instance. The only exception to this general rule (``contact the local postmaster first'') arises in cases that are irrelevant to NCAR's situation, i.e. cases where, for example, the local postmaster address at the site that originated the spam is something like . In such cases, the person doing the complaining is justified in taking the complaint DIRECTLY to the next prior hop in a traceroute, because it is pretty clear that the folks at `we-spam-u.com' are NOT going to take complaints very seriously. >... My point is only that it >should be the academic institution in question who is asked to deal >with this, not me. Yes, and I and other spam fighters would agree with you 100%, at least AS LONG AS that other institution DOES take the complaint(s) seriously, and as long as they don't just brush them off or drop them straight to the bit bucket. If that other institution just ignores the complaint however, then you might have to get involved, if for no other reason, then at least just to insure that adequate communiation WILL occur between the person who got spammed and the institution that spammed him. (Often, merely `facilitating' communiation is all that's needed.) >> So be a good chap > >Please do not be condescending... That wasn't mean't to be condescending, and I'm sorry if it came across that way. Here's is a revised version which expresses what I had intended more clearly... ``Please be a good netizen and fellow human being...'' Networking takes a lot of people to make it work smoothly and for the benefit of all, and never moreso than in current times. We... i.e. all of us... may occasionally need you to help facilitate communiation between ourselves and other sites you connect to. In such cases, it would be Good if you could render this sort of assistance. From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 11:02:22 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA09597; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:55:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.eskimo.com (mx1.eskimo.com [204.122.16.48]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id KAA09580 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:55:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eskimo.com (michj@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA28086 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:59:00 -0700 Received: from localhost (michj@localhost) by eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA19910 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:58:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: michj owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:58:58 -0700 (PDT) From: "Michael S. Johnson" To: List-Managers list Subject: Re: spam packet routing In-Reply-To: <200006221620.e5MGK9l01948@mail.rev.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, Bernie Cosell wrote: > The thing is that the "moral outrage" of a lot of the spam-haters often > exceeds their technical prowess, and so rather than work harder [or > learn more!] so that they can really try to figure out whence the spam, What specific advice can you offer frustrated list owners who receive a lot of spam and don't have your technical knowledge to trace them properly? I am among those people who use traceroute to the first IP address appearing in the forged headers, hoping against hope that it will reveal the name of its ISP. I then bounce the message with full headers to the abuse addresses of the closest one or two named domains upstream of the suspected offending IP address, and the following two addresses: "Federal Trade Commission: Spam Reports" , Spam Complaints - WA Attorney General's Office I take it you feel this is the wrong approach. May I learn from you what the correct approach is, or could you please point to a published resource for learning what the correct approach is? > those folk *some* sysadmin will be the actual culprit... hassling other > folk unnecessarily and inappropriately almost certainly doesn't register > high on their list of concerns... I would rather not "hassle other folk unnecessarily." However, I (apparently) lack the tools or experience to recognize the "other folk" for who they are and avoid sending them sepam complaints. Given that I receive a lot of spam through many of the same hosts (gip.net and exodus.net come to mind), and few of the people I bounce spam to actually reply with "we've terminated this user's account", it can easily feel like nothing is being done to stop the spammers, or that I'm not casting as wide a net as I should to include the "correct" responsible parties. What do you propose as a solution to that? Note: I already close lists to non-subscribers, so the spam isn't reaching them, just the list moderators and owners, which is still just as annoying as if it had been sent to me directly (and it often is). Is there a public resource where I, and less-technical spam-victims like me, can learn how to trace spam more effectively and accurately? I understand how frustrating it is for people like you, but if you don't offer constructive advice, how can you expect the flow of false complaints to abate? -- Michael S. Johnson Miyazaki Web and Mailing List Owner michj@nausicaa.net www.nausicaa.net/miyazaki/mailing-list From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 11:44:29 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA10127; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:38:54 -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 LAA10119 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:38:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by smtp2.vnet.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5MIgcG17775 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:42:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA20715 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:42:38 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:42:38 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: spam packet routing In-Reply-To: <200006221409.IAA22237@ncar.ucar.EDU> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I sent this to Greg privately yesterday. This thread is a stretch for a list managers' mailing list. The only time I complain to an ISP who was not the origin of a spam is when the spammer is obviously using the ISP conduct business. For example, I complain when the spammer uses a dropbox, open relay or web site on the ISP's servers or when the spammer has their own domain which appears to be served by the ISP. I don't hassle random systems in the route because I don't presume that every system in a given spam's route is a spam haven. - murr - From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 11:56:51 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA10262; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:50:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hotmail.com (f73.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.73]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id LAA10255 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:50:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 92529 invoked by uid 0); 22 Jun 2000 18:54:30 -0000 Message-ID: <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 209.179.161.59 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:54:30 PDT X-Originating-IP: [209.179.161.59] From: "D C" To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 18:54:30 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I recently was talking to somebody working on their own mail client, and they were planning on not including plain text support. How many lists would filter their messages out? ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 12:26:54 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA10725; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:21:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.rev.net (mail.rev.net [206.67.68.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA10717 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:21:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fantasy (USER3.GVA.NET [216.80.135.7]) by mail.rev.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e5MJOoV13198 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:24:51 -0400 Message-Id: <200006221924.e5MJOoV13198@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: List-Managers list Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:24:31 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: spam packet routing References: <200006221620.e5MGK9l01948@mail.rev.net> In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 22 Jun 2000, at 10:58, Michael S. Johnson wrote: > On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, Bernie Cosell wrote: > > > The thing is that the "moral outrage" of a lot of the spam-haters often > > exceeds their technical prowess, and so rather than work harder [or > > learn more!] so that they can really try to figure out whence the spam, > > What specific advice can you offer frustrated list owners who receive a > lot of spam and don't have your technical knowledge to trace them > properly? Well, some of that comes from being an old-timer and mostly understanding all the gibberish... But it looks like "www.samspade.org" has a lot of good information [plus a handy tool to help you out if you have a windows box nearby]. In particular, you can go to and you ought to find plenty of info there... /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 13:13:42 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA11371; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:09:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id NAA11364 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA38630 ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:17:29 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> References: <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:12:28 -0700 To: "D C" , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 6:54 PM +0000 6/22/2000, D C wrote: >I recently was talking to somebody working on their own mail client, >and they were planning on not including plain text support. IMHO, that's a big mistake. even if they do text/html by default, they ought to include a text/plain. Ther are all sorts of things that don't cleanly handle not having a text part -- not just mailing lists, but mailing to pagers, mailing to mail list daemons, mailing to PDAs, mailing to... And then there's AOL, who's mailer doesn't deal with html. Really a bad idea. > How many lists would filter their messages out? Mine would currently bounce them. Shortly, mine will probably strip to text/plain, but as soon as I can build a tool that strips certain unapproved mime types, I'll accept full MIME with reasonable limitations. But what I want to do is convince the mailman folks to add a "plain text" option to subscriptions and internally strip mime to text/plain for those that don't want it. If they don't include any plain text, these users are going to be hosed, IMHO - the universe is much larger than mailing to your friend's netscape 4 browser, and for a lot of them, you need text, or a text/plain part. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 14:11:58 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA12062; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:05:06 -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 OAA12050 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:05:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 19546 invoked by uid 100); 22 Jun 2000 17:08:51 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:08:51 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: "Michael S. Johnson" cc: List-Managers list Subject: Re: spam diagnosis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > What specific advice can you offer frustrated list owners who receive a > lot of spam and don't have your technical knowledge to trace them > properly? I am among those people who use traceroute to the first IP > address appearing in the forged headers, hoping against hope that it will > reveal the name of its ISP. Don't do that. Use a super-whois like the ones at geektools.com or samspade.org to see who's responsible for that address. As already abundantly noted, traceroutes run through a lot of networks only tangentially related to the endpoints. Once you've figured out what domain is responsible, feel free to use my abuse.net service to route your message to the responsible person for that domain. See www.abuse.net. > "Federal Trade Commission: Spam Reports" , Yes, they collect spam for statistical purposes. > Spam Complaints - WA Attorney General's Office Since you're in Washington, that's probably OK, too. > Is there a public resource where I, and less-technical spam-victims like > me, can learn how to trace spam more effectively and accurately? Some resources to help figure out where a particular spam came from include: http://spam.abuse.net/others/sites.html http://www.ybecker.net/resources/header_reading.html There's also the somewhat controversial Spamcop at www.spamcop.net, which attempts to diagnose spam sources automatically. It's better than it used to be, probably guesses right two times out of three. It's worth using to get some hints about the source of a mystery spam, although I wouldn't use it's auto-complaining feature. Regards, John Levine, postmaster@iecc.com, postmaster@gurus.com, postmaster@services.net (and postmaster of about 100 other domains) From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 15:26:49 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA12841; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:21:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dolist.systonic.fr (dolist.systonic.fr [212.234.39.133]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id PAA12834 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:21:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SMTP (unverified [212.234.39.133]) by mail.dolist.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:23:03 +0200 Received: from mail.dolist.net ([212.234.39.133]) by 212.234.39.133 (Norton AntiVirus for Internet Email Gateways 1.0) ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 22:23:02 0000 (GMT) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:22:58 +0200 From: Denis Olivier X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.44) Personal Organization: DOLIST.NET - http://www.dolist.net X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <79169194318.20000623002258@dolist.net> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? In-reply-To: <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> References: <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antirelay: Good relay from local net2 212.234.39.0/24 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Bonjour, Thursday, June 22, 2000, 8:54:30 PM, D C wrote: > I recently was talking to somebody working on their own mail client, and > they were planning on not including plain text support. How many lists > would filter their messages out? We only block HTML on large public theme lists. We look forward to hearing from you, -- Denis Olivier, ____________________________________________________________ DOLIST.NET, Internet E-mail List Server Technology DOLIST.NET information at : http://www.dolist.net From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 15:41:49 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA12983; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:38:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ma-1.rootsweb.com (ma-1.rootsweb.com [209.192.148.153]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA12976 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:38:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from twp@localhost) by ma-1.rootsweb.com (8.10.0.Beta10/8.10.0.Beta10) id e5MMfmJ54897; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 18:41:48 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 18:41:48 -0400 From: Tim Pierce To: D C Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Message-ID: <20000622184148.X33273@ma-1.rootsweb.com> References: <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.7us In-Reply-To: <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, Jun 22, 2000 at 06:54:30PM +0000, D C wrote: > I recently was talking to somebody working on their own mail client, and > they were planning on not including plain text support. How many lists > would filter their messages out? 19,000 here. -- Regards, Tim Pierce RootsWeb.com lead system admonsterator and Chief Hacking Officer From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 17:26:51 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA14086; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:18:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kachina.jetcafe.org (kachina.jetcafe.org [205.147.43.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA14079 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:18:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ee-nt.climber.org (eckert@netcom13.netcom.com [199.183.9.113]) by kachina.jetcafe.org (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA09806 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:21:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <4.3.1.0.20000622171856.00c2e9c0@pop.climber.org> X-Sender: eckert@pop.climber.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1 Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:21:06 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: SRE Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? In-Reply-To: References: <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 01:12 PM 6/22/00, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >Mine would currently bounce them. Shortly, mine will probably strip to >text/plain, but as soon as I can build a tool that strips certain unapproved >mime types, I'll accept full MIME with reasonable limitations. Get a copy of demime.pl, install it in a pipe, and you're done. I'm very happy with it, and stripping/reformatting HTML and MIME is vastly preferable to bouncing it! Demime home page: http://scifi.squawk.com/demime.html Demime perl script: http://scifi.squawk.com/demime.stable Demime config file: http://scifi.squawk.com/demime_junkmail.cf From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 17:41:50 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA14271; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:39:41 -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 RAA14264 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:39:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by smtp2.vnet.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5N0hTn05395; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 20:43:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA07174; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 20:43:29 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 20:43:29 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: D C cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? In-Reply-To: <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, D C wrote: > ... How many lists would filter their messages out? Can't say how common the practice is. I only accept plain text on lists that I run. - murr - From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 18:26:51 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA14561; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 18:17:39 -0700 (PDT) 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 SAA14554 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 18:17:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 22656 invoked by uid 50); 23 Jun 2000 01:21:28 -0000 To: List-Managers list Subject: Re: spam packet routing References: <200006221620.e5MGK9l01948@mail.rev.net> <200006221924.e5MJOoV13198@mail.rev.net> In-Reply-To: "Bernie Cosell"'s message of "Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:24:31 -0400" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 22 Jun 2000 18:21:28 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 24 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Bernie Cosell writes: > Well, some of that comes from being an old-timer and mostly > understanding all the gibberish... But it looks like "www.samspade.org" > has a lot of good information [plus a handy tool to help you out if you > have a windows box nearby]. In particular, you can go to > and you ought to find > plenty of info there... And to add to that: If there are more than three abuse addresses in the header of your initial complaint mail (spammer, relay, drop-box), as a general rule you're complaining to too many people at once. Please do *not* send complaints to more than one address at a given site. If you're worried that abuse@site won't work and don't want to deal with the bounce, use the abuse.net forwarding service. People at most sites can handle forwarding misdirected mail to the appropriate internal address; the exception is mostly just huge ISPs who think they're big enough to force other people to jump through their hoops. When I get mail that's addressed to postmaster, abuse, security, InterNIC contacts, *and* root all at once, my immediate inclination is to ignore it completely; it definitely doesn't make me want to help the person. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 19:11:54 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id TAA15174; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 19:07:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id TAA15163 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 19:07:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5N2Apo20856; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 19:10:51 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <200006221620.e5MGK9l01948@mail.rev.net> <200006221924.e5MJOoV13198@mail.rev.net> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 19:10:41 -0700 To: Russ Allbery , List-Managers list From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: spam packet routing Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 6:21 PM -0700 6/22/2000, Russ Allbery wrote: >And to add to that: If there are more than three abuse addresses in the >header of your initial complaint mail (spammer, relay, drop-box), as a >general rule you're complaining to too many people at once. I view these the way I view car alarms. Annoying, not terribly effective, and the approach tends to desensitize everyone around them to the problem after a while, so they stop paying attention. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 19:26:55 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id TAA15173; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 19:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id TAA15158 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 19:07:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5N2Ano20853; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 19:10:49 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.0.20000622171856.00c2e9c0@pop.climber.org> References: <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> <4.3.1.0.20000622171856.00c2e9c0@pop.climber.org> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 19:09:38 -0700 To: SRE , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 5:21 PM -0700 6/22/2000, SRE wrote: >Get a copy of demime.pl, install it in a pipe, and you're done. >I'm very happy with it, and stripping/reformatting HTML and MIME >is vastly preferable to bouncing it! short term, that's what I'm likely to do. Longer term, I want to rewrite mailman to do the stripping internally, so users can choose whether or not they want the subscription in styled format the way they can choose regular or MIME digests. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 20:56:53 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id UAA16030; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 20:44:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.vjs.org (cc50165-b.hwrd1.md.home.com [24.9.159.241]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id UAA16023 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 20:44:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.11] (192.168.0.222) by mail.vjs.org with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 2.2); Thu, 22 Jun 2000 23:47:55 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20000622184148.X33273@ma-1.rootsweb.com> References: <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> <20000622184148.X33273@ma-1.rootsweb.com> X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 5.0 for Cray T3E-1200 Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 23:23:07 -0400 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Vince Sabio Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ** Sometime around 18:41 -0400 06/22/2000, Tim Pierce sent us: >On Thu, Jun 22, 2000 at 06:54:30PM +0000, D C wrote: > > I recently was talking to somebody working on their own mail client, and > > they were planning on not including plain text support. How many lists > > would filter their messages out? > >19,000 here. Tim wins for the most succinctly entertaining response of the day. In my case, about 18 public lists and about two dozen ISOC mailing lists, all of which accept text/plain only. __________________________________________________________________________ Vince Sabio Got Bounces? vince-lists@vjs.org Got Jokes? Got Spam? From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 22:26:54 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id WAA17194; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 22:20:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bom3.vsnl.net.in (bom3.vsnl.net.in [202.54.4.24]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id WAA17180 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 22:19:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 202.54.4.24 (PPP114-207.bom.vsnl.net.in [202.54.114.207]) by bom3.vsnl.net.in (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id KAA03452 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:53:17 +0530 (IST) Received: by RHS with Microsoft Mail id <01BFDCFA.917BAF00@RHS>; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:05:33 +0530 Message-ID: <01BFDCFA.917BAF00@RHS> From: Rajesh Singh X-mailserver: Sent using the PostMaster (v3.1.5) To: "list-managers@GreatCircle.COM" Subject: RE: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:05:30 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk list end -----Original Message----- From: Chuq Von Rospach [SMTP:chuqui@plaidworks.com] Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 7:40 AM To: SRE; list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? At 5:21 PM -0700 6/22/2000, SRE wrote: >Get a copy of demime.pl, install it in a pipe, and you're done. >I'm very happy with it, and stripping/reformatting HTML and MIME >is vastly preferable to bouncing it! short term, that's what I'm likely to do. Longer term, I want to rewrite mailman to do the stripping internally, so users can choose whether or not they want the subscription in styled format the way they can choose regular or MIME digests. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" -------------------------------------------------------------- Minicomp Ltd., Bombay, India From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 22 23:41:58 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id XAA18379; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 23:38:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from listes.cru.fr (listes.cru.fr [195.220.94.165]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id XAA18372 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 23:38:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from home.cru.fr (home.cru.fr [195.220.94.79]) by listes.cru.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.2) with ESMTP id IAA13391 ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 08:41:57 +0200 Received: from home.cru.fr (IDENT:aumont@localhost.cru.fr [127.0.0.1]) by home.cru.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.1) with ESMTP id IAA14870 ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 08:41:57 +0200 Message-Id: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: "D C" cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? In-Reply-To: Message from "D C" of "Thu, 22 Jun 2000 18:54:30 GMT." <20000622185430.92528.qmail@hotmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 08:41:57 +0200 From: Aumont - Comite Reseaux des Universites Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I recently was talking to somebody working on their own mail client, and > they were planning on not including plain text support. How many lists > would filter their messages out? Of course it is stupid to provide mail without text/plain. Text/plain is very usefull for many email application, but it is a nice provocation because MLM is often a argument to break Mime usage. Even if there is a lot of bag usage of Mime, Mime is part of internet* standard, a MLM should be able to carry any kind of mime messages and MLM should be able to use itself Mime features. Sympa MLM is able to reject or to forward multipart or multipart/alternative messages to the list editor. This can be configured foreach list (or for all the list server). Sympa is also able to parse multipart messages for list server commands and to send welcome or helpfile messages using text/html (or any other complex mime stucture). In addition , Sympa can perform multipart/signed SMIME messages in order to authenticate the message sender before ditribute it or perform a privileged command. We plans to introduce a lot of new features based on MIME. - Multipart/crypted : decrypte SMIME messages and send the message to each subscriber crypted with its public key. - Multipart/mixed : - reject (or send to editor) some kind of attachement like application/word - extract some kind of attachement from the message distributed but leave them in the web archive of the mailling list - ... - Multipart/alternative : perform subscriber format preference in order to send to each subscriber its prefered format when distributing a Multipart/alternative message (so some users will received text/plain where some others will receive the text/html alternative). I think that MLM should be a good reason to use more and more Mime features. Serge ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Serge Aumont CRU (french academic network technical team) campus Beaulieu 35042 Rennes Cedex France From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 00:56:52 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id AAA19082; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:43:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id AAA19075 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:42:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5N7kLo21579; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:46:21 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:46:33 -0700 To: Aumont - Comite Reseaux des Universites , "D C" From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 8:41 AM +0200 6/23/2000, Aumont - Comite Reseaux des Universites wrote: >I think that MLM should be a good reason to use more and more Mime >features. The research we've done shows that ~80% of our users want our newsletters via e-mail, and about that percentage are actively using HTML or styled text in e-mail already. This is a huge shift in the last year, FWIW. This has gone from a future to endemic in about 7 months. On the other hand, opening up to mime opens you up to problems, especially with active content (from java, jscript, applets, flash, whatever), as well as exploding message sizes. The exploding message size is increasingly a minor issue thanks to 56k modems, DSL and broadband, but still has to be considered. The active content stuff still scares the cr@p out of me, especially given the recent virus issues. I currently want to get to a point where styled text is acceptable, and non-active data can be attached (jpegs, gifs, png), managing that by size of message limits; but at the same time, one also needs to strip active content from the messages to be safe, and also strip URLs to active content, since I don't think it matters if the virus comes on the message, or if you click on a link and download the virus... And that's the crux. No real tool yet that does that "well" (which, IMHO, includes in-message documentation of what was stripped...). There's going to be a need for a text/plain option as well. For our big lists, we use separate mailings. We're experimenting with multipart/alternative, but it's not necessarily ready for prime time yet on a wide scale (or as wide a scale as we need); it works fine on the intranet level where you have a little more control of which mailers are used. Active content's a real doozy issue. It's one reason why I've decided against doing any Flash on any of my web sites -- because even though nobody's done a Flash virus, since that's really a program executed on the client site, there's still risk there. So I'm keeping it simple to avoid the risks... -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 08:21:16 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id IAA26000; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 08:06:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from magpie.a001.sprintmail.com (magpie.prod.itd.earthlink.net [209.178.63.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id IAA25993 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 08:05:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rebekah (sdn-ar-005waseatP161.dialsprint.net [168.191.237.97]) by magpie.a001.sprintmail.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA05375 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 08:09:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> From: "Chris McEwen" To: References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 08:09:46 -0700 Organization: Socrates Press 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 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk The threat of hostile active content in a world that has seen an explosion of email borne viruses makes the thought of permitting any such messages unthinkable. The public may want active content but only up to the time that their business records are lost. Side comment on the level of threat on embedded active content vs links to active content. In the case of links, the list member is taking the initiative. This is not the case in embedded content. Second problem, exploding band width, isn't only a matter of the receiving side's capacity. What about the server? If a list of 5,000 members sends 20 messages a day averaging 4k, the bandwidth is 380 MB per day or 11 GB a month. Double or triple that with HTML and applets. Then consider that is only one list on one server. Imagine the same server has 50 lists. Then imagine the backbone. Then imagine... and imagine... and imagine.... At some point functionality will have to prevail over fashion. I just know it. --Chris McEwen socrates@NWStamps.com Socrates Press ----- Original Message ----- From: Chuq Von Rospach On the other hand, opening up to mime opens you up to problems, especially with active content (from java, jscript, applets, flash, whatever), as well as exploding message sizes. The exploding message size is increasingly a minor issue thanks to 56k modems, DSL and broadband, but still has to be considered. The active content stuff still scares the cr@p out of me, especially given the recent virus issues. I currently want to get to a point where styled text is acceptable, and non-active data can be attached (jpegs, gifs, png), managing that by size of message limits; but at the same time, one also needs to strip active content from the messages to be safe, and also strip URLs to active content, since I don't think it matters if the virus comes on the message, or if you click on a link and download the virus... And that's the crux. No real tool yet that does that "well" (which, IMHO, includes in-message documentation of what was stripped...). From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 10:07:08 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA26904; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 09:33:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA26896 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 09:33:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA47576 ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 09:41:49 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 09:36:53 -0700 To: "Chris McEwen" , From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 8:09 AM -0700 6/23/2000, Chris McEwen wrote: >The threat of hostile active content in a world that has seen an explosion >of email borne viruses makes the thought of permitting any such messages >unthinkable. Agreed. that's why active content worries me so much. > The public may want active content but only up to the time that >their business records are lost. nope. they'll still want their content, they'll just want it safely. And as a list admin, I think it's part of our responsibility to make sure that what we deliver is safe. > >Side comment on the level of threat on embedded active content vs links to >active content. In the case of links, the list member is taking the >initiative. This is not the case in embedded content. true, but you also have ot know your audience. If it's technically sophisticated, you can give them the onus of responsibilty, but fi your users are more naive or not technical, I think it's important to be more careful about saving them from themselves -- after all, the technically naive/inexperienced sees a link, and doesn't necessarily understand what happens behind the link. For that matter iwth the technically naive, it's probably not safe to assume they understand that link might not be generated by the list server itself... >Second problem, exploding band width, isn't only a matter of the receiving >side's capacity. What about the server? If a list of 5,000 members sends 20 >messages a day averaging 4k, the bandwidth is 380 MB per day or 11 GB a >month. Double or triple that with HTML and applets. If you're just sending HTML instead of plain text, it's a little under double. If you do multipart/alternative, it's about 3X because both forms are enclosed. If you embed the graphics in the file, you're probably crazy, but the file size is based on the encoded graphic sizes. We don't embed graphics, both because of file size issues and because it allows users to tell their readres to turn off graphics if they want, so they have the option. Network bandwidth just isn't going to be that big of an issue -- other than if you're going to do something like this, you need to make sure you have bandwidth. Same can be said for verping. To be honest, though, unless you run lists where bounces are fairly well controlled, you're likely wasting a bunch of bandwidth on bounces already... >At some point functionality will have to prevail over fashion. I just know >it. it is -- these things add lots of new capability and functionality. it can be used badly, but it doesn't invalidate the technologies. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 11:14:44 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA27786; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:58:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.rev.net (mail.rev.net [206.67.68.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id KAA27778 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:58:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fantasy (USER7.GVA.NET [216.80.135.11]) by mail.rev.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e5NI2hx07722 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:02:43 -0400 Message-Id: <200006231802.e5NI2hx07722@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:02:38 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? In-reply-to: <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 23 Jun 2000, at 8:09, Chris McEwen wrote: > Side comment on the level of threat on embedded active content vs links to > active content. In the case of links, the list member is taking the > initiative. This is not the case in embedded content. Is that true? I thought that with the KAK-virus patch for OE [from a year ago] we had seen the last of problems from 'embedded' worms. AFAIK, none of the recent headline-grabbers [nor any others I've seen go by in a while now] cause any problem for anyone unless you have a gullible user "taking the initiative"... This is not to defend passing-through potentially-active-content, only to clarify that to first order there isn't that much difference between link vs embedded: in both cases, you need to hoodwink the user into telling his mail client "go do it", and once you can do that *anything* [mostly bad..:o)] can happen. You can argue [probably correctly] that "via link" is harder to infect with [i.e., requires an even *denser* user], but still in both cases the ultimate problem isn't really the email but the "nut behind the wheel"... /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 12:27:00 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA29013; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 12:22:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ma-1.rootsweb.com (ma-1.rootsweb.com [209.192.148.153]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA29006 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 12:22:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from twp@localhost) by ma-1.rootsweb.com (8.10.0.Beta10/8.10.0.Beta10) id e5NJQHS11216; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:26:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:26:17 -0400 From: Tim Pierce To: Chuq Von Rospach Cc: Chris McEwen , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Message-ID: <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.7us In-Reply-To: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Fri, Jun 23, 2000 at 09:36:53AM -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > At 8:09 AM -0700 6/23/2000, Chris McEwen wrote: > > The public may want active content but only up to the time that > >their business records are lost. > > nope. they'll still want their content, they'll just want it safely. I am not sure I agree that they want active content. The fact that 80% of your users say they did doesn't necessarily mean anything. You're really asking two questions. One is "would you like this to happen?" The other is "would you go away if we failed to do this?" I could ask our users if they would like a free coffee and bagel upon subscribing, and most of them would probably say yes, they would like that very much. That doesn't mean that they'd be disappointed if we don't do that. At this point, delivering active content is somewhat less wise than delivering free coffee and donuts to all users, so we will probably not do either. I doubt that we will lose many readers. -- Regards, Tim Pierce RootsWeb.com lead system admonsterator and Chief Hacking Officer From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 13:27:02 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA29415; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 13:09:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id NAA29408 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 13:09:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5NKCeo22898; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 13:12:40 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 13:10:55 -0700 To: Tim Pierce , Chuq Von Rospach From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Cc: Chris McEwen , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 3:26 PM -0400 6/23/2000, Tim Pierce wrote: >I am not sure I agree that they want active content. The fact >that 80% of your users say they did doesn't necessarily mean >anything. My studies don't agree with you, but I guess they could all be lying to me, just to make a point or something. (shrug). No offense, Tim, but -- this seems rather non-sensical. "Just because they tell you they want it doesn't mean they really want it". >You're really asking two questions. One is "would you like this >to happen?" The other is "would you go away if we failed to do >this?" No, not really. >I doubt that we >will lose many readers. short term? probably. Long term? less clear. But beyond losing readers, what about the readers that choose to not sign up? There are separate issues here: satisfying your current subscriber base, and attracting new subscribers. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 15:22:35 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA00843; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:00:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ma-1.rootsweb.com (ma-1.rootsweb.com [209.192.148.153]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA00836 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:00:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from twp@localhost) by ma-1.rootsweb.com (8.10.0.Beta10/8.10.0.Beta10) id e5NM4TU12663; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 18:04:29 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 18:04:29 -0400 From: Tim Pierce To: Chuq Von Rospach Cc: Chris McEwen , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Message-ID: <20000623180428.R1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.7us In-Reply-To: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Fri, Jun 23, 2000 at 01:10:55PM -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > > No offense, Tim, but -- this seems rather non-sensical. "Just because > they tell you they want it doesn't mean they really want it". Users want good service. Of course they'll want active content if you ask them. But if you asked, let's say, "Do you want exciting content on your lists like HTML, JavaScript, animations and rich text documents, bearing in mind that some of these technologies include security hazards that could severely impair your computer software and even destroy data?" I'll bet that the response would be considerably less than 80%. > But beyond losing > readers, what about the readers that choose to not sign up? There are > separate issues here: satisfying your current subscriber base, and > attracting new subscribers. To answer that question, you need some way of measuring how many people fail to sign up because you don't offer active content. I'd be interested in seeing an attempt to quantify that, but I don't think that just polling your users to say "Do you guys like HTML?" cuts it. -- Regards, Tim Pierce RootsWeb.com lead system admonsterator and Chief Hacking Officer From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 15:53:31 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA01144; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:34:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id PAA01137 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:34:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5NMcUo23286; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:38:30 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20000623180428.R1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> <20000623180428.R1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:37:41 -0700 To: Tim Pierce , Chuq Von Rospach From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Cc: Chris McEwen , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 6:04 PM -0400 6/23/2000, Tim Pierce wrote: >To answer that question, you need some way of measuring how many >people fail to sign up because you don't offer active content. True. >I'd be interested in seeing an attempt to quantify that, but I >don't think that just polling your users to say "Do you guys like >HTML?" cuts it. I guess it all comes down to whether you want the data to tell youw aht the users think, or whether you want it to guarantee a given response in favor or against. you can tweak your questions any way you want. If you're happy with the status quo, great. But on the internet, if you live with the status quo, wave to everyone watching you in the rear view mirror, because nothing else is standing still. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 16:37:38 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA01676; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:11:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from delcluster1.vsnl.net.in (del3.vsnl.net.in [202.54.96.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id QAA01669 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:11:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vsnl.com ([203.197.204.76]) by delcluster1.vsnl.net.in (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id EAA27182 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 04:45:41 -0500 (GMT) Message-ID: <3953F25A.5B90ECBD@vsnl.com> Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 04:57:22 +0530 From: veshno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: (no subject) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk information list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 16:54:16 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA01907; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:38:45 -0700 (PDT) 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 QAA01900 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:38:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 26414 invoked by uid 50); 23 Jun 2000 23:42:44 -0000 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> In-Reply-To: Chuq Von Rospach's message of "Fri, 23 Jun 2000 13:10:55 -0700" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 23 Jun 2000 16:42:44 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 19 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chuq Von Rospach writes: > No offense, Tim, but -- this seems rather non-sensical. "Just because > they tell you they want it doesn't mean they really want it". There are huge survey bias problems in determining whether they want it or not. Are you sure you've taken that into account? Most people will answer "yes" to "do you want pretty, more readable e-mail messages with nice highlighting and good color schemes" and will answer "no" to "do you want the e-mail messages we send you to cause your computer to automatically do things out of your control in response to the mail that could be potentially dangerous." Which question did you ask? :) And is the average user in possession of enough information and understanding to correctly judge the tradeoffs, even for themselves? -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 17:07:42 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA01833; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:32:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from domains.invweb.net (domains.invweb.net [198.182.196.32]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id QAA01826 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:32:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from whgiii (root@openpgp.net [199.184.252.29]) by domains.invweb.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA15588; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 19:36:04 -0400 Message-Id: <200006232336.TAA15588@domains.invweb.net> From: "William H. Geiger III" Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 18:17:22 -0500 To: Chuq Von Rospach In-Reply-To: Cc: Aumont - Comite Reseaux des Universites , "D C" , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for OS/2 v2.19zg/19zg Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In , on 06/23/00 at 01:46 AM, Chuq Von Rospach said: >At 8:41 AM +0200 6/23/2000, Aumont - Comite Reseaux des Universites >wrote: >>I think that MLM should be a good reason to use more and more Mime >>features. >The research we've done shows that ~80% of our users want our >newsletters via e-mail, and about that percentage are actively using >HTML or styled text in e-mail already. This is a huge shift in the last >year, FWIW. This has gone from a future to endemic in about 7 months. IMHO if you can't say it with text then chances are it's not worth reading. At a very minimum if you insist on sending HTML via e-mail then you should use multipart/alternative format so your readers who are interested in the *content* of your newsletter can still enjoy it without having to deal with rest. A good example of all the wrong ways of doing a newsletter is Wired. Below is an excerpt from the last newsletter I received (and the last one I will ever get): What you are seeing is the Wired News (html) being sent to you via email. In order for this service to function properly, you have to be online and read your mail through an email client that supports HTML messages. Now I am sorry but if I wanted to be online with a web-browser to read a newsletter I would click on my bookmark and download the @!@$ thing. I don't want Wired or anyone else pushing a Mb or two of crap just to read an article. BTW exactly what do you mean by "actively" using HTML or formatted text? IIRC Eudora, Outlook, N$ will all send out formatted text by default without the user ever knowing it. Are they really spending time formatting their messages or are they sending out text messages with a few automatic formatting tags? I don't consider an e-mail program automatically wrapping a URL in a HREF tag as legitimate justification to be pushing webpages via e-mail. -- --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Data Security & Cryptology Consulting Programming, Networking, Analysis PGP for OS/2: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html E-Secure: http://www.openpgp.net/esecure.html --------------------------------------------------------------- From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 17:53:50 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA02526; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 17:39:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA02519 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 17:39:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5O0gmo23602; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 17:42:48 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 17:40:12 -0700 To: Russ Allbery , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 4:42 PM -0700 6/23/2000, Russ Allbery wrote: >There are huge survey bias problems in determining whether they want it or >not. Are you sure you've taken that into account? Yes. The surveys were professionally done and designed to be non-biased. We weren't interested in a specific answer. We wanted to know what users thought. >And is the average user in possession of enough information and >understanding to correctly judge the tradeoffs, even for themselves? To the best of our ability to do this right, the answer is yes. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 18:08:58 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA02593; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 17:43:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from castro.queernet.org (castro.queernet.org [209.157.101.253]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA02586 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 17:43:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (rogerk@localhost) by castro.queernet.org (8.10.0.Beta6/8.10.0.Beta6) with ESMTP id e5O0lmA09299 Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 17:47:48 -0700 (PDT) From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" To: Chuq Von Rospach cc: Tim Pierce , Chris McEwen , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? 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 Fri, 23 Jun 2000, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > short term? probably. Long term? less clear. But beyond losing > readers, what about the readers that choose to not sign up? There are > separate issues here: satisfying your current subscriber base, and > attracting new subscribers. I can vouch, for instance, for the several lists we've lost to Egroups because of our refusal to carry attachments. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE rogerk@QueerNet.ORG urgent: rogerk-page@QueerNet.ORG PO Box 14309 San Francisco, CA 94114 +1 415 ALL-ARFF "There is only one real blasphemy -- the refusal of joy!" -- Paul Rudnick From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 18:23:53 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA02721; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 17:55:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id RAA02714 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 17:55:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5O0x1o23644; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 17:59:01 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 17:59:13 -0700 To: "Roger B.A. Klorese" , Chuq Von Rospach From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Cc: Tim Pierce , Chris McEwen , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 5:47 PM -0700 6/23/2000, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote: >I can vouch, for instance, for the several lists we've lost to Egroups >because of our refusal to carry attachments. 9 months ago, text was still king. Today, 80-85% of our subscribers are using either AOL, or one of the two browsers version 4 or 5. Nine months ago, about 20% were using a version 4 browser. And with version 4 browsers, styled text (meaning, generally, HTML) went mainstream. Fortunately, it seems to me the big technological leap in e-mail is slowing down so everyone can consolidate gains (and losses) and fix the glitches in the technologies (which definitely exist. My test group for my new mail server, which is pretty small, has uncovered some interesting tweaks. For instance, OE 5 sends HTML mail using HTML 4 and CSS, but Navigator 4 reads HTML, but can't read the CSS, so even between HTML capable browssers, there are disconnects. But that's no different than the general HTML disconnects that make being a web designer so much fun today) Over the last four months the most common question has gone from "what is this stuff?" to "why *can't* I post it?".... -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 19:13:14 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA03219; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 18:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.vjs.org (cc50165-b.hwrd1.md.home.com [24.9.159.241]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id SAA03212 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 18:47:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.11] (192.168.0.224) by mail.vjs.org with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 2.2); Fri, 23 Jun 2000 21:51:20 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 5.0 for Cray T3E-1200 Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 21:45:38 -0400 To: Russ Allbery , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Vince Sabio Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ** Sometime around 16:42 -0700 06/23/2000, Russ Allbery sent us: >And is the average user in possession of enough information and >understanding to correctly judge the tradeoffs, even for themselves? Revised question: Should the average user be permitted to use a modem? __________________________________________________________________________ Vince Sabio Got Bounces? vince-lists@vjs.org Got Jokes? Got Spam? From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 20:09:22 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id TAA03859; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 19:52:50 -0700 (PDT) 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 TAA03852 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 19:52:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 27538 invoked by uid 50); 24 Jun 2000 02:56:51 -0000 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> In-Reply-To: Chuq Von Rospach's message of "Fri, 23 Jun 2000 17:40:12 -0700" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 23 Jun 2000 19:56:51 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 14 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chuq Von Rospach writes: > At 4:42 PM -0700 6/23/2000, Russ Allbery wrote: >> There are huge survey bias problems in determining whether they want it >> or not. Are you sure you've taken that into account? > Yes. The surveys were professionally done and designed to be > non-biased. We weren't interested in a specific answer. We wanted to > know what users thought. Okay, fair enough. Interesting, thanks. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Fri Jun 23 21:53:49 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA04951; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 21:36:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id VAA04944 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 21:36:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5O4eJo23991; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 21:40:20 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 21:32:48 -0700 To: Vince Sabio , Russ Allbery , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 9:45 PM -0400 6/23/2000, Vince Sabio wrote: >Revised question: Should the average user be permitted to use a modem? If they're allowed to have kids without a license, restricting modems seems rather inconsequential. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Sat Jun 24 00:23:51 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id AAA06015; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 00:01:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.vjs.org (cc50165-b.hwrd1.md.home.com [24.9.159.241]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id AAA06008 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 00:01:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.11] (192.168.0.224) by mail.vjs.org with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 2.2); Sat, 24 Jun 2000 03:05:33 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 5.0 for Cray T3E-1200 Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 02:45:15 -0400 To: Chuq Von Rospach , Russ Allbery , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Vince Sabio Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ** Sometime around 21:32 -0700 06/23/2000, Chuq Von Rospach sent us: >At 9:45 PM -0400 6/23/2000, Vince Sabio wrote: > >>Revised question: Should the average user be permitted to use a modem? > >If they're allowed to have kids without a license, restricting >modems seems rather inconsequential. Unfortunately, in all too many cases these days, modem use seems to lead -- albeit somewhat indirectly -- to procreation. The 'Net has taken "computer dating" to new heig^W lows. __________________________________________________________________________ Vince Sabio Got Bounces? vince-lists@vjs.org Got Jokes? Got Spam? From list-managers-owner Sat Jun 24 00:46:15 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id AAA06136; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 00:16:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id AAA06126 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 00:15:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5O7Jho24289; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 00:19:43 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 00:19:59 -0700 To: Vince Sabio , Chuq Von Rospach , Russ Allbery , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 2:45 AM -0400 6/24/2000, Vince Sabio wrote: >Unfortunately, in all too many cases these days, modem use seems to >lead -- albeit somewhat indirectly -- to procreation. The 'Net has >taken "computer dating" to new heig^W lows. Modems don't screw people. People screw people. And if they don't have modems, they'll use something else. chuq (who met his wife over the internet before it ws fashionable to do so....) -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Sat Jun 24 01:08:51 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id AAA06386; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 00:51:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ma-1.rootsweb.com (ma-1.rootsweb.com [209.192.148.153]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id AAA06377 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 00:51:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from twp@localhost) by ma-1.rootsweb.com (8.10.0.Beta10/8.10.0.Beta10) id e5O7sp219108; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 03:54:51 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 03:54:50 -0400 From: Tim Pierce To: Chuq Von Rospach Cc: Chris McEwen , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Message-ID: <20000624035450.U1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> <20000623180428.R1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.7us In-Reply-To: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Fri, Jun 23, 2000 at 03:37:41PM -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > > If you're happy with the status quo, great. But on the internet, if > you live with the status quo, wave to everyone watching you in the > rear view mirror, because nothing else is standing still. I've been hearing predictions of the death of text since at least 1990. It hasn't happened yet. I'm looking hard, but I still don't see evidence that it's going to happen any time soon. People leave RootsWeb for a variety of reasons, but nobody has ever told me that the inability to post HTML or binary attachments was a factor. We strip multipart/alternative bodies so that only the plain text goes through, and by golly, nobody complains. There is no apparent mass exodus for the pretty blinking lights. The simple fact of the matter is that people will go to get the content they want. If they can only get that in HTML, they'll do that, and if they can only get it in plain text, they'll do that; and very few people consider it a serious problem if plain text is the *only* resource. If people are deciding whether or not to use your service on the basis of whether they can get it in HTML, it's not a sign that HTML is about to take over the world. It's a sign that you have boring content. -- Regards, Tim Pierce RootsWeb.com lead system admonsterator and Chief Hacking Officer From list-managers-owner Sat Jun 24 08:11:55 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id IAA13323; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 08:08:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id IAA13316 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 08:08:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5OFCTo25143; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 08:12:29 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20000624035450.U1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> References: <200006230641.IAA14870@home.cru.fr> <006801bfdd25$12373680$2370fea9@rebekah> <20000623152617.O1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> <20000623180428.R1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> <20000624035450.U1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 08:12:42 -0700 To: Tim Pierce , Chuq Von Rospach From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Cc: Chris McEwen , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 3:54 AM -0400 6/24/2000, Tim Pierce wrote: > >If people are deciding whether or not to use your service on the >basis of whether they can get it in HTML, it's not a sign that HTML >is about to take over the world. It's a sign that you have boring >content. Oh. I'll go shoot myself then. thanks, Tim, for clearing that up. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Sat Jun 24 08:42:37 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id IAA13448; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 08:28:07 -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 IAA13441 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 08:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from voyager (d99.dial-4.cmb.ma.ultra.net [209.6.67.99]) by antiochus-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult/n20340/mtc.v2) with SMTP id LAA19165 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 11:32:05 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.20000624153313.006f45d8@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: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 11:33:13 -0400 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Stan Ryckman Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 09:36 AM 6/23/00 -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: [snip] >If you're just sending HTML instead of plain text, it's a little >under double. If you do multipart/alternative, it's about 3X because >both forms are enclosed. When I last checked actual messages, it was about 3x and 4x. The limiting ratio of a message full of " " would be 6x and 7x, plus a bit more for the extra headers. I'd guess what I am seeing is that way too many "tools" out there are constructing messages full of long (unneeded) runs of the no-break-space (" ") sequence and don't do any size optimization. This is literally lots of bandwidth being used for zero information content. And, if HTML mail does become widely accepted in any sense, I am confident that Microsoft will find a way to set up new compose defaults to make bandwidth worse... perhaps a URL to retrieve each character :-) Cheers, Stan From list-managers-owner Sat Jun 24 09:26:55 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA13910; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 09:21:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from castro.queernet.org (castro.queernet.org [209.157.101.253]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA13903 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 09:21:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (rogerk@localhost) by castro.queernet.org (8.10.0.Beta6/8.10.0.Beta6) with ESMTP id e5OGPXs21985 Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 09:25:33 -0700 (PDT) From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" To: Tim Pierce cc: Chuq Von Rospach , Chris McEwen , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? In-Reply-To: <20000624035450.U1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > If people are deciding whether or not to use your service on the > basis of whether they can get it in HTML, it's not a sign that HTML > is about to take over the world. It's a sign that you have boring > content. And, further, on the subject of HTML: there have indeed been a few people who HAVE taken entire lists away because of the lack of HTML. They were newsletter/announcement lists, and felt thast text-only took away their ability to control the look of their publications. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE rogerk@QueerNet.ORG urgent: rogerk-page@QueerNet.ORG PO Box 14309 San Francisco, CA 94114 +1 415 ALL-ARFF "There is only one real blasphemy -- the refusal of joy!" -- Paul Rudnick From list-managers-owner Sat Jun 24 09:41:56 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA13883; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 09:19:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from castro.queernet.org (castro.queernet.org [209.157.101.253]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA13876 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 09:19:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (rogerk@localhost) by castro.queernet.org (8.10.0.Beta6/8.10.0.Beta6) with ESMTP id e5OGNdl21910 Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 09:23:39 -0700 (PDT) From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" To: Tim Pierce cc: Chuq Von Rospach , Chris McEwen , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? In-Reply-To: <20000624035450.U1095@ma-1.rootsweb.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Sat, 24 Jun 2000, Tim Pierce wrote: > If people are deciding whether or not to use your service on the > basis of whether they can get it in HTML, it's not a sign that HTML > is about to take over the world. It's a sign that you have boring > content. As I said, in our case it's not HTML, but rather, attachments. And that's because on our music lists, they want to post music; on our comix lists, they want to post comix; on our penpal lists, they want to post their photos; etc. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE rogerk@QueerNet.ORG urgent: rogerk-page@QueerNet.ORG PO Box 14309 San Francisco, CA 94114 +1 415 ALL-ARFF "There is only one real blasphemy -- the refusal of joy!" -- Paul Rudnick From list-managers-owner Sat Jun 24 09:56:51 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA13739; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 09:00:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from yellow.rahul.net (yellow.rahul.net [192.160.13.18]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA13730 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 09:00:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rahul.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow.rahul.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A06317C2C for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 09:04:20 -0700 (PDT) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: How many people filter/block MIME on their lists? In-reply-to: Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 09:04:20 -0700 From: Michelle Dick Message-Id: <20000624160420.A06317C2C@yellow.rahul.net> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chuq wrote: > Over the last four months the most common question has gone from > "what is this stuff?" to "why *can't* I post it?".... My list hasn't had that transition. In fact, last week I went through a wave of complaints because a small badly formated message did get through and caused strike-out lines through the digest on many people's readers and junk on others. They asked me if my non-text filter was broken and why did the bad message get through and could I please fix it to make sure they only got regular text since the list is advertised as a plain text mailing list. I even had one person say, paraphrased: "if you are going non-text, let me know, because I'll need to unsubscribe". I've never gotten a "why *can't* I post" whine in response to my rejections of non-text submissions. Invariably, I get a "oh!, so sorry, I'll fix it." And they do. Sometimes with my help, sometimes on their own. Indeed, more than one has thanked me since other people they were emailing were complaining to them too, and they hadn't know what was wrong or how to fix until I helped them. And mine isn't even a technical list. It is mostly women, if that makes a difference. I also have recently had a complaint about my website from a long-time reader who is blind who said the javascript(which I use for ads) was screwing up her adapted-browser. In this case, I couldn't fix it for her :-( because ads pay the bills. But she did find she could use the ftp access to the site archives just fine. Glad she got something to work for her, but it really bugs me that my site is inaccessible to a long-time reader. -- Michelle Dick artemis@rahul.net East Palo Alto, CA From list-managers-owner Sun Jun 25 09:26:06 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA27866; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 09:13:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id JAA27859 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 09:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from TOM (slip-32-100-223-219.ct.us.prserv.net [32.100.223.219]) by grassyhill.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA04541 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 12:17:07 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from tneff@panix.com) From: "Tom Neff" To: Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 12:17:09 -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 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <200006250800.BAA21483@honor.greatcircle.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Importance: Normal Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk For lists with something non-Net related (i.e. real world) to talk about, text still wins in my experience. The more mail people get, the more they appreciate a simple text-only Digest on a daily topic of interest like WW1 aviation. Nevertheless, there is a fraction of readers that actively wants and likes to send HTML and attachments, etc. They are not the majority and they should not dictate how things go for everybody else, but they exist. There is another (growing) fraction that has no idea what HTML is, or what the difference is between HTML vs. text, or attachments vs. quoting, or which they are sending, or how to change settings to send something else, or why anybody would care. They just know that Outlook Express or Eudora seems to be working, and they press this button here. My goal as a list administrator is to protect the rights and interests of all members, including those who need or prefer plain text and low bandwidth. I can't afford the smug foolishness of admins who jettison or ignore plain-text members for being "behind the curve" (strangely reminiscent of "get a real browser!!" on cretinous software-specific Web pages). What I wish I had were some tools that let me please the greatest number of members. Maybe they exist and I haven't found them; maybe I'll have to write some in my C.F.T. Specifically I wish that members could opt to receive * Plain text only (MIME-extracted from a multipart, or LYNX-rendered from HTML, if necessary), OR... * HTML/styled text; * Individual messages, OR * Concatenated "omnibus" Digest, OR * Multipart MIME Digest; * Attachments mailed as attachments to the message or Digest, OR * Attachments stored server side in a file spool and sent as URL's, OR * Attachments over a member-specified size sent as URL's. I also wish, although this isn't a MIME issue and it's hard to achieve on the server side, that there was a proper "reply wizard" available that would allow a replying member to choose carefully between sending to the whole list, versus sending privately to just one message author. While we were at it, we could pre-empt tricks like attaching an entire Digest to the reply. At least that stuff can be stripped at the server. From list-managers-owner Sun Jun 25 12:25:48 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA29271; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 12:23:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from janus.hosting4u.net (janus.hosting4u.net [209.15.2.37]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with SMTP id MAA29264 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 12:23:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 16534 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2000 19:27:38 -0000 Received: from gemini.hosting4u.net (HELO macnauchtan.com) (209.15.2.47) by mail-gate.hosting4u.net with SMTP; 25 Jun 2000 19:27:38 -0000 Received: from [192.168.1.11] ([166.44.184.145]) by macnauchtan.com ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:27:34 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: dmcnutt@mail.macnauchtan.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 13:28:11 -0600 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: "Douglas P. McNutt" Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:17 -0400 06/25/00, Tom Neff wrote: >For lists with something non-Net related (i.e. real world) to talk about, text still wins in my experience. Agreed. I'm a lurker who is about to start managing a list and wants to do it right the first time. The only feature other than TEXT, whatever that is, that I really want is the ability to wrap lines at the RECEIVING end. I am frustrated by intermediates which insist on adding returns in indiscriminate fashion. When my 65 year old eyes are tired at night I want to change the font size and have my 22 inch Apple monitor display nicely wrapped text in a big easy-to-follow proportionally spaced serif font. I want it to work even for quoted material and even if the message has passed through a digest processor. I want my Macintosh TeachText format and I don't want UNIX or NT (VMS) servers mucking with it. I don't want a bunch of equal signs at the ends of lines either. Just pass the text back out the way it came in where a return character or character pair indicates end of paragraph. HTML can make that happen but it's in spite of the dumb things that MajorDomo seems to do like imposing a limit of 255 characters in a paragraph in a digest. But I tend to put off reading mail that arrives in html pretty much forever. With few exceptions html is an indicator of display advertising which I filter out anyway. This text will not be wrapped as I send it. It will be interesting to see what it looks like when it comes back. Shrink your viewing window and see if your reader wraps lines to the new size. Am I asking too much? -- -> From the U S of A, the only socialist country that refuses to admit it. <- From list-managers-owner Sun Jun 25 12:40:36 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA29349; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 12:29:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mds1.mastnet.net (mds1.mastnet.net [206.65.193.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id MAA29342 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 12:29:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 0d8xk (ppp-161.lake-jackson.mastnet.net [206.66.213.161]) by mds1.mastnet.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA29793 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:28:24 -0500 From: "Alan S. Harrell" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:34:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME Reply-to: ASHandRR@mastnet.net Message-ID: <39561880.9911.AE2CCC@localhost> In-reply-to: References: <200006250800.BAA21483@honor.greatcircle.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 25 Jun 2000, 12:17, Tom Neff wrote: > For lists with something non-Net related (i.e. real world) to talk > about, text still wins in my experience. The more mail people get, the > more they appreciate a simple text-only Digest on a daily topic of > interest like WW1 aviation. I feel the same way about "Net related" mailing lists, which are now just as much the real world to all of us. > Nevertheless, there is a fraction of readers that actively wants and > likes to send HTML and attachments, etc. They are not the majority and > they should not dictate how things go for everybody else, but they > exist. Don't we all have a responsibility to show them that their desire to use HTML in e-mail is largely a brainwashing attempt by the commercial element of the Internet in order to present more dynamic ad presentations? We all understand that HTML in e-mail does not in any way improve the actual content of the message. The value of the content and communication of e-mail is to be found in it's words and not in it's pictures and colors. But this is not enough in the world of advertising. Advertisers must have psychological tools to sway you into buying their product or service. Words are not enough. In advertising, plain ascii text just does not have the selling power of that which HTML e-mail packs. I refuse HTML on my lists for all of the standard reasons, as has been enumerated on this list the last few days. But one other reason I refuse it is because I have a strong aversion for outside commercial interests to use my own resources to further their gain. When I see HTML mail, I feel like I am being used for someone else's gain. I don't want that for myself or my subscribers. > There is another (growing) fraction that has no idea what HTML is, or > what the difference is between HTML vs. text, or attachments vs. > quoting, or which they are sending, or how to change settings to send > something else, or why anybody would care. They just know that Outlook > Express or Eudora seems to be working, and they press this button here. All modern, popular e-mail clients now come with HTML capability. The newcomer to the Internet almost always see's the point of view of the big commercial interests, first and foremost. When they get to us, they are often already brainwashed or deceived into thinking that HTML belongs in e-mail. It often becomes a kick in the head for them to learn the grim realities of the Internet. Our job is to parenthetically kick them in the head and teach them the realities of the Internet. I find myself constantly teaching Internet "right from wrong" to newcomers. Some reject my advice and go on to act the part of the captive consumer that the commercial interests want them to be. But many others do finally come to see the value in using plain text as the means of communication in e-mail. > My goal as a list administrator is to protect the rights and interests > of all members, including those who need or prefer plain text and low > bandwidth. I can't afford the smug foolishness of admins who jettison > or ignore plain-text members for being "behind the curve" (strangely > reminiscent of "get a real browser!!" on cretinous software-specific Web > pages). I agree with you. For those whom think HTML mail is "behind the curve" I might point out that HTML mail is closer to reactionary caveman drawings as a means to communicate. Text e-mail, on the other hand, is the written word of modern times and in human communications, that has far more power than pictures. A picture may be worth a thousand words but I submit to you that one well written sentence can conjure up a thousand pictures in one's mind. > What I wish I had were some tools that let me please the greatest number > of members. Maybe they exist and I haven't found them; maybe I'll have > to write some in my C.F.T. Specifically I wish that members could opt > to receive > > * Plain text only (MIME-extracted from a multipart, or LYNX-rendered > from > HTML, if necessary), OR... > * HTML/styled text; > > * Individual messages, OR > * Concatenated "omnibus" Digest, OR > * Multipart MIME Digest; > > * Attachments mailed as attachments to the message or Digest, OR > * Attachments stored server side in a file spool and sent as URL's, OR > * Attachments over a member-specified size sent as URL's. I feel sure you could now do all that if you really wanted to go to the trouble. I would not wish to give my subscribers that many options. As owner and/or administrators of our lists, we have to make our own decisions and draw the line somewhere. A mailing list is a benevolent dictatorship and not a "to each his own" utopia. > I also wish, although this isn't a MIME issue and it's hard to achieve > on the server side, that there was a proper "reply wizard" available > that would allow a replying member to choose carefully between sending > to the whole list, versus sending privately to just one message author. Most e-mail clients have that capability. I just did that with this reply. > While we were at it, we could pre-empt tricks like attaching an entire > Digest to the reply. I have not had them tested yet, but I believe the taboo filters I have in place will prevent that. If not, then I am prepared to teach, to lecture, to fuss, or whatever it takes to get the point across. > At least that stuff can be stripped at the server. It can be done, but I never want to miss an opportunity to teach a newbie "my way" to the Internet. So in that vein, I allow them to trip up some. I know I can no longer reach the crusty veterans on this list whom have been sucked into the commercial abyss, but I sure can influence a whole lot of newcomers to the Internet to my way of thinking about things. :-) Alan ASHandRR@MASTNET.net http://www.ashlists.org/ From list-managers-owner Sun Jun 25 15:10:56 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA00668; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:55:57 -0700 (PDT) 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 OAA00661 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:55:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 8346 invoked by uid 50); 25 Jun 2000 22:00:15 -0000 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME References: In-Reply-To: "Douglas P. McNutt"'s message of "Sun, 25 Jun 2000 13:28:11 -0600" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 25 Jun 2000 15:00:14 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 21 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Douglas P McNutt writes: > The only feature other than TEXT, whatever that is, that I really want > is the ability to wrap lines at the RECEIVING end. I am frustrated by > intermediates which insist on adding returns in indiscriminate > fashion. When my 65 year old eyes are tired at night I want to change > the font size and have my 22 inch Apple monitor display nicely wrapped > text in a big easy-to-follow proportionally spaced serif font. . Already supported by Gnus and Eudora at the least; I'm not sure how widespread it's gotten. I used to think it was a horrible idea; since then, while I still think it's an amazingly ugly hack in some respects, I've been convinced that it's not a bad solution to the problem. It lets one send <80 column lines and have other MUAs still know when to rewrap the text and when not to. I haven't started sending it by default yet, but I'm getting tempted to do so. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Sun Jun 25 15:25:37 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA00882; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 15:10:40 -0700 (PDT) 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 PAA00875 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 15:10:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 8351 invoked by uid 50); 25 Jun 2000 22:14:59 -0000 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME References: <200006250800.BAA21483@honor.greatcircle.com> <39561880.9911.AE2CCC@localhost> In-Reply-To: "Alan S. Harrell"'s message of "Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:34:40 -0500" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 25 Jun 2000 15:14:59 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 45 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Alan S Harrell writes: > Don't we all have a responsibility to show them that their desire to use > HTML in e-mail is largely a brainwashing attempt by the commercial > element of the Internet in order to present more dynamic ad > presentations? We all understand that HTML in e-mail does not in any > way improve the actual content of the message. But as much as traditionalists might like this to be the case (and I definitely count myself in that category), it really isn't entirely true. I had a very enlightening conversation with a friend of mine a while back, who's also a technical person but in addition was an English major and is a semi-professional writer. Turns out he uses text/enriched extensively. I gave him the standard reaction, and he nodded understanding, but then pointed out that when you're sending drafts of something back and forth with a co-writer, having strikeout and annotations in different colors really is invaluable and hard to do any other way. Sure, I'd probably find some plain text way of marking such things up, such as characters in the margin, but I have tools available like emacs with its rectangular editing mode that lets me do things like that with a great deal more ease than 95% of the e-mail-using population. And a pure text markup really is somewhat inferior to being able to mark things with color. (The amount of semantic information that can be communicated with color is truly staggering and hard to appreciate until you've experimented with it; I never thought it was worth much until I started playing with and customizing color ls, and now not having color noticeably slows down my ability to navigate directories or parse my e-mail which Gnus nicely colorizes for me.) And the alternative, in this case for that sort of application, isn't to use plain text for most people. It's to send MS Word attachments instead. Y'know, I really prefer text/enriched or text/html over that. Now, I fully agree that the vast majority of people using HTML or other markup languages aren't using them anywhere near as intelligently as my friend. My mail reader displays HTML, and for the most part all that means is that spam looks even more incredibly ugly than it did before (if you think their text is bad, you haven't seen anything until you've seen the blue text on orange backgrounds). But occasionally someone does use it right, and then it's actually fairly nice and arguably useful. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Sun Jun 25 15:56:07 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA01944; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 15:52:31 -0700 (PDT) Delivered-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from mds1.mastnet.net (mds1.mastnet.net [206.65.193.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 169CA17E89 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 15:52:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 0d8xk (ppp-196.lake-jackson.mastnet.net [206.66.213.196]) by mds1.mastnet.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA08531 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:50:59 -0500 From: "Alan S. Harrell" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:57:15 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME Reply-To: ASHandRR@mastnet.net Message-ID: <395647FB.31861.7B8821@localhost> In-reply-to: References: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 25 Jun 2000, 13:28, Douglas P. McNutt wrote: [...] > This text will not be wrapped as I send it. It will be interesting to > see what it looks like when it comes back. Shrink your viewing window > and see if your reader wraps lines to the new size. I use Pegasus as my mail client. I pressed F5 and your message was perfectly reformatted for reading. > Am I asking too much? Yes. Every e-mail client has differences in their formating sending styles, even with ascii text. Use of proportional fonts can also muck up the formatting on the receiving end. This is something you learn to deal with by trial and error and acceptance of that over which you have no control. In the meantime set your line length no more than 72 characters for both the composition and reading windows and use fixed width fonts, such as Courier New to read and compose your mail. Alan ASHandRR@MASTNET.net From list-managers-owner Sun Jun 25 16:02:49 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA02225; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 16:01:15 -0700 (PDT) Delivered-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from mail.rev.net (mail.rev.net [206.67.68.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DE5E17E89 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 16:01:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fantasy (USER133.GVA.NET [216.80.135.137]) by mail.rev.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e5PN5VM24446 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 19:05:31 -0400 Message-Id: <200006252305.e5PN5VM24446@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 19:05:29 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME In-reply-to: References: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 25 Jun 2000, at 13:28, Douglas P. McNutt wrote: > The only feature other than TEXT, whatever that is, that I really want is the ability to wrap lines at the RECEIVING end. I am frustrated by intermediates which insist on adding returns in indiscriminate fashion. When my 65 year old eyes are tired at night I want to change the font size and have my 22 inch Apple monitor display nicely wrapped text in a big easy-to-follow proportionally spaced serif font. > Am I asking too much? Depends... if the only thing you ever receive via email is paragraphs of text, then it can work fine. If you receive stuff that has been carefully formatted [columned, long lines inserted from a log file, multiline math equations, etc], it is very hard, if possible at all, to guess right and reformat it. I find that if I run with 'local wrap' I end up trashing more messages than I "help", not to mention that very few [any?] mail systems handle local-wrapping of included, cited text [don't you love it when you read the cited text with no marks in the margin and ">"s scatter all through it?] Something that'd make us both happy would be if folks used the "text/flowed" format, which was designed for *JUST* this purpose [see RFC2646], instead of messing up "text/plain". /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Sun Jun 25 16:40:54 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA02595; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 16:38:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.rev.net (mail.rev.net [206.67.68.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B34AB17E89 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 16:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fantasy (USER133.GVA.NET [216.80.135.137]) by mail.rev.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e5PNgNT25138 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 19:42:23 -0400 Message-Id: <200006252342.e5PNgNT25138@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 19:42:21 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME In-reply-to: <39561880.9911.AE2CCC@localhost> References: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 25 Jun 2000, at 14:34, Alan S. Harrell wrote: > Don't we all have a responsibility to show them that their desire to > use HTML in e-mail is largely a brainwashing attempt by the commercial > element of the Internet in order to present more dynamic ad > presentations? You're just wrong. Period. Nearly from _day_one_ folks have been dissatisfied with "plain text" and wanted more -- real fonts, formatting, footnotes, images, etc. BBN fooled with a form of that when email was barely out of diapers [was it "Scribe"? I can't remember now], there was some IEEE standard for that stuff, and there have been half-a-dozen other "shots" at nicer-than-text email over the years. I happen to think that HTML is undoubtedly the _worst_ of the choices that I"ve seen come down the pike, but to think that there's not a _genuine_ and reasonable desire for "more than ASCII" is, IMO, myopic. > ... We all understand that HTML in e-mail does not in any > way improve the actual content of the message. Well, you're playing with words here a bit, talking about "actual content". Granted: if you have something worthwhile to say *IN*TEXT*, then the import of your words will largely transcend the formatting [or lack thereof], at least for _some_ content. But of course, content *CAN* be improved with the ability to use different fonts appropriately, inclusion of figures, etc. And there is content that is VERY hard to transmit in just-plain-text that can be quite well served with an well-placed sidebar, or a helpful graph or illustration. Indeed, I mentioned in another note to this list [sent just a minute ago] that one reason I *don't* local-line-wrap is that I get a fair number of equations. In order to kowtow to the exigencies of "plain text", mathematica will give you equations like: 2 2 2 x + y = z [and you can only imagine what it ends up looking like with continued fractions, integrals, summations etc]. THAT stuff would be _infinitely_ helped by having "more than text" [indeed, in the spirit of multipart alternative, some of the authors stick in a second copy of the equations in LaTeX so that folk who are reading it in an appropriate environment [not me, it turns out] can just format it up pretty and almost have a chance at deciphering it Even just *reading* "plain text' isn't so good: fixed-with fonts, while we compugeeks are mostly used to them, are a fairly marginal compromise [fat i's, skinny w's] compared to "decent" fonts Altogether, there's a *LOT* of sense to going beyond 11-point-Courier-72- char-line email... > All modern, popular e-mail clients now come with HTML capability. The > newcomer to the Internet almost always see's the point of view of the > big commercial interests, first and foremost. When they get to us, > they are often already brainwashed or deceived into thinking that HTML > belongs in e-mail. See, that's where we differ --- I've seen DECADES of folk "come to email" and in every case they mostly *HATE* "all Courier all the time". Ever since we moved beyond lineprinters/spinwriters for our documents and got laserprinters, folks got used to reading [and writing] using real fonts, standard printers conventions [imagine, using actual _italics_ for emphasis, instead of underscores..:o), not to mention *BOLDFACE* instead of all-caps to make something stand out, nor having superscripts and subscripts or the occasional graph or even a real footnote] There's actually _real_information_communications_ reasons in all of those printing conventions that we plain-ASCII folk snub our noses at... > ... It often becomes a kick in the head for them to > learn the grim realities of the Internet. Our job is to > parenthetically kick them in the head and teach them the realities of > the Internet. Well, perhaps --- YOUR "reality of the internet" is to stay resolutely rooted in the world of model-33-TTYs, VT100s, and lineprinters.. Note that I'm arguing devils' advocate here, since I'm a staunch ASCII-only guy and I, too, hate HTML email... The reason I'm pushing back is that your arguments about anti-HTML are, IMO, *wrong*... And your vitriol, which I actually find more than a little bit bizarre, about 'commercial interests' just flies in the face of reality, *LONG* term [like decades-long] reality, and indeed is at odds with *everything*else* about the internet, except those two bulwarks of the RFC822 past, email and news. I think that in this day and age, *NO*ONE* [perhaps with you excepted] would actually opt for unformatted-plain-text if there was a reasonable alternative. > I agree with you. For those whom think HTML mail is "behind the curve" > I might point out that HTML mail is closer to reactionary caveman > drawings as a means to communicate. You might, but you'd be wrong. HTML is a *lousy* 'markup' language, but it is lightyears beyond "plain text"... > .. Text e-mail, on the other hand, is > the written word of modern times and in human communications, that has > far more power than pictures. This is just crap: text email is a *SUBSET* of formatted email, and so anything you could do with plain-ASCCI you could do in HTML or RTF or EPS or PDF.... what you *can't* do in plain text is make use of any of the information/communication enhancements that make text easier to read, easier to apprehend, etc.. the stuff we've *learned* about document presentation over the last 500 years ... It is -plain-text- that's really the 'throwback'. /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Sun Jun 25 17:40:41 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA03194; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:32:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.rev.net (mail.rev.net [206.67.68.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9120417E89 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:32:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fantasy (USER133.GVA.NET [216.80.135.137]) by mail.rev.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e5Q0aRo26341 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 20:36:27 -0400 Message-Id: <200006260036.e5Q0aRo26341@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 20:36:22 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Distribution delay through greatcircle... X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I was just wondering if it is my SMTP connection or if everyone is seeing two-hour turnarounds on list-managers traffic... It is a bit strange that the delay is _that_ long [it is at least a factor-of-ten longer than with any other mailing list I'm on (or can ever recall being on)] and I'm wondering if it is me or GreatCircle... /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Sun Jun 25 18:11:39 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA03558; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:07:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kirkwood.hoosier.net (kirkwood.hoosier.net [206.106.64.12]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4388917E89 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:07:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (lev@localhost) by kirkwood.hoosier.net (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01077; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 20:12:01 -0500 Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 20:12:01 -0500 (EST) From: "Paul K." X-Sender: lev@kirkwood.hoosier.net To: Bernie Cosell Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME In-Reply-To: <200006252342.e5PNgNT25138@mail.rev.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Sun, 25 Jun 2000, Bernie Cosell wrote: > You're just wrong. Period. Nearly from _day_one_ folks have been > dissatisfied with "plain text" and wanted more -- real fonts, formatting, > footnotes, images, etc. BBN fooled with a form of that when email was Do you count PINE out? (It is a UNIX-based e-mailer, which I think contains features [plus speed] making it competive with Windowing e-mailers.) Just wonder5ing - Paul . . . Human powered vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O __O O O O _O < _-\<,_ _\_/^* _\__ \_/^* /| | /| (*)/ (*) (*) O (*) \* O From list-managers-owner Sun Jun 25 18:55:40 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA03900; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:49:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.postmodern.com (server.postmodern.com [216.240.39.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5178E17E89 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:49:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mcb@localhost) by server.postmodern.com (8.8.5/mcb-980201) id SAA25542; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:53:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200006260153.SAA25542@server.postmodern.com> From: mcb@postmodern.com (Michael C. Berch) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:53:29 +0000 In-Reply-To: <200006260036.e5Q0aRo26341@mail.rev.net> X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Distribution delay through greatcircle... Cc: "Bernie Cosell" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I was just wondering if it is my SMTP connection or if everyone is seeing > two-hour turnarounds on list-managers traffic... It is a bit strange > that the delay is _that_ long [it is at least a factor-of-ten longer than > with any other mailing list I'm on (or can ever recall being on)] and I'm > wondering if it is me or GreatCircle... It might be us. Brent upgraded the mailer on greatcircle,com over the weekend (I was out of town mostly) and there may have been some issues with moving the mail queue. Let's see if it disappears in the next couple of days. -- Michael C. Berch List-Managers list manager mcb@greatcircle.com / mcb@postmodern.com From list-managers-owner Sun Jun 25 23:28:47 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id XAA07211; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 23:24:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix, from userid 1013) id 7706D17E8A; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 23:24:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from roscoe.burstmedia.com ([207.159.105.131]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id FAA20109 for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 05:08:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by roscoe.burstmedia.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10) id ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 08:12:54 -0400 Message-ID: From: Bob McCown To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Customizing individual messages Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 08:12:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi all I appreciate all the help Ive recieved in the past, and have yet another question, this one a bit more tricky. We currently deliver a couple hundred thousand opt-in emails a day, and there is a growing need/want by our user base that we allow customizing messages per recipient. Currently, we use bulk_mailer to bundle them up into discreet envelopes per host. Now, I know I can remove this and send out individual messages, but the time to deliver an entire list increases dramatically. My quesiton is does anybody have any ideas of something out there that would allow me to send customized messages, yet keep the bulk_mailer kind of mail bundling? Any help or pointers would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -=Bob <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Bob McCown Project Manager, Web Site and New Development Burst! Media LLC - What Do You Really Care About? P: (781) 852-5219 F: (718) 272-0897 <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 00:13:13 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id XAA07219; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 23:24:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix, from userid 1013) id 8B5B917E8B; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 23:24:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gsp.org (rsk.tidalwave.com [208.211.3.21]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-980202-1) with ESMTP id FAA20392 for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 05:47:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsk@localhost) by gsp.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA18378 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 08:52:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 08:52:23 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Message-ID: <20000621085222.A18336@gsp.org> References: <200006160131.UAA27165@mail.xnet.com> <20000620063021.A7502@gsp.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from chuqui@plaidworks.com on Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 10:39:29PM -0700 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 10:39:29PM -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > So do I. > >[*] Lack of confirmation does not scale. > > Baloney. But more on that later, too. Fine. I'll read it. But understand me clearly: anything which allows a third-party to subscribe to a mailing list without my *prior* consent, i.e. which compels me to clean up the mess, is a spam-by-proxy tool. In other words, if you have a mechanism which accomplishes what confirmation does -- ensuring that I have in fact actually requested to be subscribed *before* subscribing me -- then I'm all ears. I'd love to have alternatives. But if it *doesn't* do that, then it's ineffective and irresponsible, because it allows a malicious third party to co-opt your mailing list(s) and others' mailing list(s) to perform a mailbomb/spam-by-proxy/whatever-you-wish-to-call-it attack. ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk@gsp.org From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 03:46:41 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id DAA12225; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 03:20:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fellspt.charm.net (fellspt.charm.net [199.0.70.29]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D85D717E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 03:20:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from billfant (coretel-116-135.charm.net [209.143.116.135]) by fellspt.charm.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id GAA25865 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 06:24:59 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200006261024.GAA25865@fellspt.charm.net> From: "Bill Fant" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 06:22:08 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: egroups In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hello all, Forgive me for bringing up a subject that has been discussed intensively on this group previously, but I have a friend who wants to start an egroups list. I recall list members expressing some misgivings about egroups in the past. Could anyone point me to, or summarize, reasons pro and con for using the the egroups service? Thanks in advance. Bill Fant From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 05:57:03 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id FAA13787; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 05:36:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sws5.ctd.ornl.gov (sws5.ctd.ornl.gov [160.91.68.105]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C705117E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 05:36:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 196319 invoked by uid 3995); 26 Jun 2000 12:40:54 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14679.20310.120506.96118@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:40:54 -0400 (EDT) From: Dave Sill To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME In-Reply-To: <200006252342.e5PNgNT25138@mail.rev.net> References: <200006252342.e5PNgNT25138@mail.rev.net> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 "20 Minutes to Nikko" XEmacs Lucid (patch 2) Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak Ridge, Tenn., USA X-Face: "p~Q]mg{;e*}YR|)&Q/&Q\*~5UWfZX34;5M wrote: >You're just wrong. Period. Nearly from _day_one_ folks have been >dissatisfied with "plain text" and wanted more -- real fonts, formatting, >footnotes, images, etc. Of course. Consider the fate of gopher vs. the web. I'm suprised SMTP hasn't been replaced by HTMP. -Dave From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 07:32:12 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA14725; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 07:04:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02D4A17E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 07:04:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5QE8Qo02387; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 07:08:26 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <14679.20310.120506.96118@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> References: <200006252342.e5PNgNT25138@mail.rev.net> <14679.20310.120506.96118@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 07:02:05 -0700 To: Dave Sill , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 8:40 AM -0400 6/26/2000, Dave Sill wrote: >Of course. Consider the fate of gopher vs. the web. I'm suprised SMTP >hasn't been replaced by HTMP. No need, of course. SMTP carries the enhanced traffic just fine. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 08:40:44 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id IAA15260; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:05:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9794617E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:05:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 5213 invoked by uid 100); 26 Jun 2000 11:09:47 -0400 Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:09:45 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Bob McCown Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Customizing individual messages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > My quesiton is does anybody have any ideas of something out there that > would allow me to send customized messages, yet keep the bulk_mailer kind of > mail bundling? You can't do that -- bulk_mailer puts multiple addresses on a single message. If the messages are different, you have to send them separately. The benefits of the kind of bundling that bulk_mailer does are debatable. There's a tradeoff between bandwidth and throughput, and I've seen pretty convincing evidence that even on identical messages, individual deliveries get all the mail delivered faster than bundled ones due to less waiting for network latency, even though the total amount of network traffic is greater. (This is the crux of the qmail vs. sendmail flame war, which I'm not interested in rekindling.) So anyway, if you want to send individual messages, do so and forget about bulk_mailer. Lots of systems such as Lyris do so, and work fine. 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 Mon Jun 26 09:31:44 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id IAA15867; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:59:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marlborough.cnchost.com (marlborough.concentric.net [207.155.248.14]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9571117E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:59:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from escallop ([204.217.159.3]) by marlborough.cnchost.com id MAA07811; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:03:54 -0400 (EDT) [ConcentricHost SMTP Relay 1.8] Message-ID: <200006261603.MAA07811@marlborough.cnchost.com> From: "Jim Trigg" To: List-Managers list Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:03:51 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: spam packet routing References: "Bernie Cosell"'s message of "Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:24:31 -0400" In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 22 Jun 00, at 18:21, Russ Allbery wrote: > And to add to that: If there are more than three abuse addresses in the > header of your initial complaint mail (spammer, relay, drop-box), as a > general rule you're complaining to too many people at once. Please do > *not* send complaints to more than one address at a given site. If you're > worried that abuse@site won't work and don't want to deal with the bounce, > use the abuse.net forwarding service. People at most sites can handle And if more than one address is listed with abuse.net, how do I decide which address to use? Also, in addition to the spammer and the relay, I feel that I should complain to not only any drop-boxes there may be (sometimes more than one) but any web host being advertised by the spam. Jim Trigg From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 09:45:27 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA16197; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:25:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sws5.ctd.ornl.gov (sws5.ctd.ornl.gov [160.91.68.105]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3B5EE17E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:24:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 199840 invoked by uid 3995); 26 Jun 2000 16:29:29 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14679.34025.63535.676108@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:29:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Dave Sill To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME In-Reply-To: References: <200006252342.e5PNgNT25138@mail.rev.net> <14679.20310.120506.96118@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 "20 Minutes to Nikko" XEmacs Lucid (patch 2) Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak Ridge, Tenn., USA X-Face: "p~Q]mg{;e*}YR|)&Q/&Q\*~5UWfZX34;5M wrote: >At 8:40 AM -0400 6/26/2000, Dave Sill wrote: > >>Of course. Consider the fate of gopher vs. the web. I'm suprised SMTP >>hasn't been replaced by HTMP. > >No need, of course. SMTP carries the enhanced traffic just fine. I was being facetious, but I must say I think MIME is hideous, and a mail protocol designed for multimedia/multi-language would be *much* nicer. Come to think of it, MIME's kludginess is probably the reason e-mail is still mostly plain text. -Dave From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 09:52:18 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA16270; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:30:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A429817E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:30:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA31984 ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:39:54 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20000626123259.A10148@gsp.org> References: <200006160131.UAA27165@mail.xnet.com> <20000620063021.A7502@gsp.org> <20000621085222.A18336@gsp.org> <20000626111829.A9056@gsp.org> <20000626123259.A10148@gsp.org> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:34:47 -0700 To: Rich Kulawiec , Chuq Von Rospach From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:32 PM -0400 6/26/2000, Rich Kulawiec wrote: >Opt-out == spamming. It's not acceptable (at least not to me). that's your opinion, and you're welcome to it. I'm not telling you to change, even though I think you're seriously wrong. I'm simpl saying I'm going to give up trying to show you why I think you're wrong. > >Let me ask again: could you please provide pointers to documentation >of such attacks? No. I'm out of the business of trying to teach this list stuff it doesn't want to know. I don't CARE, and I ahve more productive uses of my time. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 10:07:50 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA16452; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:47:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.pacifier.com (asteroid.pacifier.com [199.2.117.154]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6F8217E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:47:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell.pacifier.com (IDENT:neil@shell.pacifier.com [199.2.117.66]) by smtp.pacifier.com (8.9.3/8.9.3pop) with ESMTP id JAA14469; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:51:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:52:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Neil To: Bill Fant Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: egroups In-Reply-To: <200006261024.GAA25865@fellspt.charm.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Mon, 26 Jun 2000, Bill Fant wrote: > Hello all, > > Forgive me for bringing up a subject that has been discussed intensively on > this group previously, but I have a friend who wants to start an egroups list. > I recall list members expressing some misgivings about egroups in the past. > Could anyone point me to, or summarize, reasons pro and con for using the the > egroups service? Thanks in advance. What exactly are egroups? Does it use Majordomo? Do you have configuration control as you do with Majordomo? Neil From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 10:23:24 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA16669; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:03:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21F4617E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:03:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA23786 ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:11:54 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20000626130745.A10580@gsp.org> References: <200006160131.UAA27165@mail.xnet.com> <20000620063021.A7502@gsp.org> <20000621085222.A18336@gsp.org> <20000626111829.A9056@gsp.org> <20000626123259.A10148@gsp.org> <20000626130745.A10580@gsp.org> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:06:46 -0700 To: Rich Kulawiec , Chuq Von Rospach From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 1:07 PM -0400 6/26/2000, Rich Kulawiec wrote: >You've never *tried* to show why (I/we) are wrong, Yes, I ahve, and every time I've been shouted down with "anything but what we say is okay is spam". Sorry, I'm tired of yelling at brick walls. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 10:38:33 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA16695; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:04:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mds1.mastnet.net (mds1.mastnet.net [206.65.193.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1821317E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:04:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 0d8xk (ppp-198.lake-jackson.mastnet.net [206.66.213.198]) by mds1.mastnet.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA32585 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:03:24 -0500 From: "Alan S. Harrell" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:09:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: egroups Reply-To: ASHandRR@mastnet.net Message-ID: <395747EA.17182.10294D4@localhost> In-reply-to: <200006261024.GAA25865@fellspt.charm.net> References: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 26 Jun 2000, 6:22, Bill Fant wrote: > Forgive me for bringing up a subject that has been discussed intensively > on this group previously, but I have a friend who wants to start an > egroups list. I recall list members expressing some misgivings about > egroups in the past. Could anyone point me to, or summarize, reasons pro > and con for using the the egroups service? Thanks in advance. I could list several minor issues, but in my way of thinking the only major negatives concern the actual business of eGroups. eGroups is not in the business of hosting mailing lists. They are in the business of selling ads and selling targeted information to information brokers. The mailing lists' service are merely the means to their profits. If the privacy of your friend's subscribers is a minor issue with her, then eGroups should prove to be a viable choice. They offer several excellent features needed by most list owners and have, in my view, the best web interface tools of all the services; the fastest and most reliable servers; and the best service for those subscribers whom only have e-mail services at their disposal. An added advertisement tagline will be added to all outgoing eGroups messages. Your friend can opt to pay a nominal monthly fee to have a list without the ads, but one has to realize that your subscribers are still under the umbrella of eGroups profit objectives. Your friend will have a little less control of her list -- fewer decisions that she can make on their own, than if she hosted her list on a contracted service where the host made it's money from hosting and not advertisements. If your friend is new to list ownership, then I would encourage you to recommend she start a list there. After learning the trade, she can then look to move the list to a safer haven, if she finds she is unhappy about anything at eGroups. Alan ASHandRR@MASTNET.net From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 10:53:01 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA17064; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:36:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49C3C17E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:36:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA38512 ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:45:52 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <14679.34025.63535.676108@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> References: <200006252342.e5PNgNT25138@mail.rev.net> <14679.20310.120506.96118@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> <14679.34025.63535.676108@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:40:51 -0700 To: Dave Sill , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:29 PM -0400 6/26/2000, Dave Sill wrote: > >No need, of course. SMTP carries the enhanced traffic just fine. > >I was being facetious, but I must say I think MIME is hideous, and a >mail protocol designed for multimedia/multi-language would be *much* >nicer. MIME has its flaws, but it's a reasonable way to layer new functionality in without rewriting everything from scratch. The job of replacing SMTP would be immense. It'd sure have its advantages, but I'm not convinced it's worth the work. it'd be fun to think about, though. What would meta-SMTP need, and what problems with the current SMTP ought to be fixed? >Come to think of it, MIME's kludginess is probably the reason e-mail >is still mostly plain text. I don't think so. I'm not entirely sure most mail is still plain text, but I don't have numbers on that. But it's an interesting thing to take a look at. Instead, I think the reality is that it's only been the last six months or so that mailers that really handle MIME well have gotten out there and been adopted, mostly because the net at large has finally made the shift from 3.x release browsers to more current releases and their associated mailers. Developers are finishing up rounds of new releases that support this, which is why (finally) I think email is going to slow down and stop being a moving target. The last year's been fun to watch, but stressful to support and develop to. Hmm. I'm sure I can track down some numbers on this, if I can find time. it'd be interesting to know what the message stream is without guessing. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 11:08:05 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA16982; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:31:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5DA817E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:30:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA29462 ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:39:35 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:34:23 -0700 To: John R Levine , Bob McCown From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: Customizing individual messages Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 11:09 AM -0400 6/26/2000, John R Levine wrote: >The benefits of the kind of bundling that bulk_mailer does are debatable. Traditionally, the argument for bulk_mailer is against the standard delivery method for majordomo, which is to lump everything into one batch. individual deliveries is simply bulk mailer taken to the extreme, that of one mail batch per address. >There's a tradeoff between bandwidth and throughput, As you move towards VERPing, you add a lot of potentially useful functionality, both in bounce processing and in end-user simplification (pre-encoding unsub URLs, for instance, to give two-click removals...). The downside is more network bandwidth to carry this (but exactly how much depends on your user mix; if 90% of your subscribers are on AOL, you'll see a big change. If they're spread you, you'll see a smaller one) and increased system loading, especially disk I/O. If you're trying to use a resource-limited machine to process your lists, these things can hurt. If you have the processing power to handle it, it can help a lot, and give you some interesting features. I've been working on a replacement to bulk_mailer for a while for my site. it's in early test, and it's in under 100 lines of perl. I plan on adding the ability to feed it a tab-delimited data set (instead of just a sendmail alias file) down the road, giving us full custom-mail-merge capability, and it'll probably be under 200 lines of perl. >convincing evidence that even on identical messages, individual deliveries >get all the mail delivered faster than bundled ones due to less waiting for >network latency, even though the total amount of network traffic is greater. And if you, by going to VERP, clean up your list better and cut the number of bouncing/dead addresses, you can buy back some of that extra traffic in the mail being slogged around to dead addresses and the returned bounces..... >So anyway, if you want to send individual messages, do so and forget about >bulk_mailer. Lots of systems such as Lyris do so, and work fine. Yup. Using perl and the SMTP modules, you can build in this kind of delivery fairly quickly and rather nicely. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 11:18:30 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA15963; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:04:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7915C17E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:03:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA29680 ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:12:55 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20000626111829.A9056@gsp.org> References: <200006160131.UAA27165@mail.xnet.com> <20000620063021.A7502@gsp.org> <20000621085222.A18336@gsp.org> <20000626111829.A9056@gsp.org> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:07:58 -0700 To: Rich Kulawiec , Chuq Von Rospach From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 11:18 AM -0400 6/26/2000, Rich Kulawiec wrote: > > > which is why I won't bother discussing that stuff on this list any >> more. I'm tired of the close-minded intolerance. > >I'm tired of the spam and the attacks. Doubly so when a simple >and proven method exists to take a big bite out of the problem. A solution. Too bad some folks on this list treat it as the one and only true solution. to put it bluntly, opt-out stuff exists, won't go away, and when run properly works just fine. Too bad this list, instead of being interested in trying to figure out what "properly works" is and driving lists to do it that way, instead takes the "it's icky" attitude. It's not icky, any more than HTML email or web subscription systems are, two other emerging and vibrant parts fo the email world all. And, funny, all three are things this list has repeatedly attacked, rather than tried to figure out how to make it work right. if you guys want to live in the 80's, fine. That's your priviledge. But please, understand I'm not willing to, and not interested in sitting here and playing target to those that think that any opinion they don't agree with is an excuse for attacks. Especially from people who attack me without researching what's really going on first. > > As opposed to the mailbomb attacks being carried out by the scripters >> who simply implode a mailbox by sending out hundreds of validation >> requests? > >Hmmm. I haven't seen *any* reports of such attacks; have you? (And if so, >could you please give pointers? I'd like to see how this was carried out.) check your logs. Check the warez and hotline worlds. There are good scripts out there. no offense, Rich, but I'm out of the business of trying to tell you folks how to run your list servers. But, believe it or not, the slam attackers know about mailback validations, and they've adapted their scripts. it doens't matter to them if they implode a mailbox by mass-subscribing them or simply by blowing it up with huge numbers of "info" and "subscribe" responses.... they don't care, it still does what they want. opt-in stuff only solves SOME of the problems in the e-mail world, and I'm tired of listening to how it's the holy grail that solves everything. it doesn't. and a badly run list server is a badly run list server, period. it's not opt-in or opt-out that creates or solves problems. it's "well run" or "badly run" that does. It's too bad this list has chosen to focus on the perception that one tool in the arsenal is the ONLY tool in the arsenal, and that the one problem it solves is the only problem needing solutions. There's a lot more going on in the email world than this list is willing to deal with, so I've decided that to deal with those problems, I'll have to go find some other group to work on them. This one isn't open to it, having shown time and again many of you already consider all of the problems solved. And I'm tired of trying to convince you that the universe has changed out from under you. If you want to sit in your own little part of the world, fine. Just understand that I'm not willing to be forced to sit in there with you, when there's so much else that is being done and needs doing. Unlike some of you, I'm not telling anyone they should be doing anything, I'm just disappointed that this group, which (for the most part) I consider very knowledgable and a good resource, has chosen to turn inward instead of reaching out. What is this list useful for today? I've been really arguing with myself over that issue, since I decided a while back that other resources are needed and I didn't want to step on list-manager's toes when I create them (but -- if you can' figure out where the toes are....). There's a lot going on in the e-mail world. what hasn't any of it been talked about here? Except to put it down or turn it into yet another kneejerk diatribe against the two tools of the devil: opt-out mail lists and html mail. It's very hard to have a technological discussion on this list because it always gets sidetracked into the same old same old. whic is too bad, because as companies adopt opt-out mailings for enewsletters (as I do), HTML because their customers demand it, enriched content and all of that other stuff, standards of usage and acceptability are needed that can drive organizations towards what's needed to do these things right, and which tools ought to be used for what solutions. But this group opted out long ago as a place to drive the emerging standards and build the standards of acceptability. So I guess I'm going to have to find some other place that is willing to deal with the issues, and not simply whine about them. So I guess you can say I'm opting out of discussing the issues that I've found simply arne't feasible in this list. Those of you who are interested in dealing iwth them constructively, talk to me privately and we'll see about it. I'm tired of being a target, so I'm simply going to quit trying to get this list to deal with issues it doesn't want to deal with. We'll all be happier, I guess. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 11:38:10 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA17695; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:24:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.rev.net (mail.rev.net [206.67.68.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BB5617E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:24:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fantasy (USER104.GVA.NET [216.80.135.108]) by mail.rev.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e5QIT8A00764 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:29:09 -0400 Message-Id: <200006261829.e5QIT8A00764@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:29:02 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: The joys of opt-out X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Well, this morning I got the sixth, seventh and eighth spam-signups via: ====================================== Date sent: 26 Jun 2000 13:12:12 -0000 From: "Web Freebies 4 U" To: ListBot Member Subject: You have been added to Web Freebies 4 U The owner of this list has moved it to ListBot. If you don't think you should be on this list, please send a message to f-A9A65364F54DE4AE@listbot.com The list owner has included the following welcome message: [...] Also we would like to offer you a FREE vacation Certificate for 2 to many exciting destinations as a thank you :) to get your certificate please visit [...more spam follows...] ====================================================== You folks have told me that listbot.com isn't really a spam haven and while email to 'abuse' there always gets me a prompt apologetic reply, these things *DO* still keep coming. And if there's some way to work an opt-out list that isn't a PITA for the opted-outers, obviously the folks at listbot haven't figured it out yet... [it is always amusing to contemplate how/where spammers harvest addresses from. this one is via cosell@bbn.com. There has not been an email or usenet posting originated from this email address for >8 years now (indeed, for all practical purposes, there was no "web" when 'cosell@bbn.com' was last an active address!)... so where did they even *FIND* it..] /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 11:51:54 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA17736; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:27:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fellspt.charm.net (fellspt.charm.net [199.0.70.29]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DCF917E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:27:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (bfant@localhost) by fellspt.charm.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA12296; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:31:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:31:45 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fant To: Neil Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: egroups In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk This is the third time i have received an identical message from you. Please stop. On Mon, 26 Jun 2000, Neil wrote: > > On Mon, 26 Jun 2000, Bill Fant wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > Forgive me for bringing up a subject that has been discussed intensively on > > this group previously, but I have a friend who wants to start an egroups list. > > I recall list members expressing some misgivings about egroups in the past. > > Could anyone point me to, or summarize, reasons pro and con for using the the > > egroups service? Thanks in advance. > > What exactly are egroups? Does it use Majordomo? Do you have configuration > control as you do with Majordomo? > > Neil > > From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 12:07:20 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA17940; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:43:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.vnet.net (smtp2.vnet.net [166.82.1.32]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32D2617E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:43:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by smtp2.vnet.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5QIlws15663; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:47:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA20066; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:47:57 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:47:57 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: Jim Trigg Cc: List-Managers list Subject: Re: spam packet routing In-Reply-To: <200006261603.MAA07811@marlborough.cnchost.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Mon, 26 Jun 2000, Jim Trigg wrote: > And if more than one address is listed with abuse.net, how do > I decide which address to use? Also, in addition to the > spammer and the relay, I feel that I should complain to not > only any drop-boxes there may be (sometimes more than one) > but any web host being advertised by the spam. Personally, I check the whole spam for email dropboxes and advertised web pages. Killing dropboxes and web pages deprives spammers of the fruits of their ill gotten gains. If you only go after the source system of the spam, the spammers just move on to another throw-away account and continue doing business as usual. - murr - From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 12:21:40 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA17817; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:35:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.pacifier.com (comet.pacifier.com [199.2.117.155]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 255D417E8C for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:35:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell.pacifier.com (IDENT:neil@shell.pacifier.com [199.2.117.66]) by smtp.pacifier.com (8.9.3/8.9.3pop) with ESMTP id LAA03036 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:40:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:40:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Neil To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: egroups In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk No, you received it twice. Once because I sent it to you and once because I Cc:'d it to the list. I should have sent it to one or the other but not both. My mistake. Neil On Mon, 26 Jun 2000, Bill Fant wrote: > This is the third time i have received an identical message from you. > Please stop. > > On Mon, 26 Jun 2000, Neil wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 26 Jun 2000, Bill Fant wrote: > > > > > Hello all, > > > > > > Forgive me for bringing up a subject that has been discussed intensively on > > > this group previously, but I have a friend who wants to start an egroups list. > > > I recall list members expressing some misgivings about egroups in the past. > > > Could anyone point me to, or summarize, reasons pro and con for using the the > > > egroups service? Thanks in advance. > > > > What exactly are egroups? Does it use Majordomo? Do you have configuration > > control as you do with Majordomo? > > > > Neil > > > > > > From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 12:53:07 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA18623; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:37:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.rev.net (mail.rev.net [206.67.68.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6594117E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:36:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fantasy (USER104.GVA.NET [216.80.135.108]) by mail.rev.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e5QJfMf05401 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 15:41:22 -0400 Message-Id: <200006261941.e5QJfMf05401@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 15:41:21 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME In-reply-to: References: <14679.34025.63535.676108@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 26 Jun 2000, at 10:40, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > MIME has its flaws, but it's a reasonable way to layer new > functionality in without rewriting everything from scratch. Maybe... but one problem is that it only handles 'sections' and that's pretty limiting [unless you use MIME *SOLELY* as a wrapper and then come up with some other actual-message-format that you embed in a MIME section]. For example, to include a picture or a graph along with an email message works fine, sort of, if having it just hanging there separate works for you, but it isn't so easy to write about or include gracefully in your text [indeed, folks doing _real_ document file formats go to a lot of bother to allow you to embed graphs, pictures, etc, in documents and have that 'work' reasonable seamlessly both at the author and client ends]. > .. The job > of replacing SMTP would be immense. It'd sure have its advantages, > but I'm not convinced it's worth the work. it'd be fun to think > about, though. There are two things we're tossing around casually here: one is SMTP, RFC 821, and the other is the actual message format, RFC 822. SMTP wasn't intended to have a long lifetime [there's a reason why it was called the 'Simple' version] and it has proven to have HUGE problems [EXPN, the need for IDENT, its whole approach to relaying, handling of MAIL FROM, etc, etc, etc]... but that's, IMO, a different matter: in that case, the culprit isn't the coming of HTML but rather the coming of spam, and perhaps we can worry about that another day...:o) As for the message format, we could say some things about the underlying machinery --- perhaps the biggest gripe I'd have is that MIME [AFAIK] doesn't allow parts of the message to interact. And so, for example, I don't think it is easy to -efficiently- encode an image and then refer to it from a separate MIME section. IMO, the "multipart" stuff in MIME is mostly a not-very-elegant kludge and could stand some rethinking/redesign... And of course, you'll then run into my biggest gripe aboue where all this is going: the heir apparent to the enhanced-email encoding (once we redo RFC822 et seq to make it _carry_ this stuff more gracefully) is HTML and is the most depressing part. HTML is, as I have said several times already, without doubt the *WORST* candidate for "enhanced email" that I've seen over the years... It manages to be both too little and too much: it is too little in that its ability to express actual document- format is truly pitiful [especially compared with the -real- document- description languages]; and it is too much because along with and you get javascript, frames, tables [speaking of some markup machinery that set document formatting back ten [twenty?] years!], etc. so it is simultaneously hard for the author to make HTML display what she wants displayed and hard for the client to render it properly... UGH!!! Even RTF is better... /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 15:04:07 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA19798; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:27:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hostigos.otherwhen.com (unknown [63.103.205.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8191B17E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:26:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.otherwhen.com ([63.103.205.4]) by hostigos.otherwhen.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA00428 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 16:31:03 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from mavery@mail.otherwhen.com) Received: from PORKY/SpoolDir by mail.otherwhen.com (Mercury 1.48); 26 Jun 00 16:31:04 -0600 Received: from SpoolDir by PORKY (Mercury 1.48); 26 Jun 00 16:30:55 -0600 From: "Mike Avery" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 16:30:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: The joys of opt-out Reply-To: mavery@mail.otherwhen.com Message-ID: <39577728.4399.1A7C094@localhost> In-reply-to: <200006261829.e5QIT8A00764@mail.rev.net> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 26 Jun 2000, at 14:29, Bernie Cosell wrote: > Well, this morning I got the sixth, seventh and eighth spam-signups > via: > The list owner has included the following welcome message: > Also we would like to offer you a FREE vacation Certificate for 2 to > many exciting destinations as a thank you :) to get your certificate > please visit > [...more spam follows...] > ====================================================== > You folks have told me that listbot.com isn't really a spam haven and > while email to 'abuse' there always gets me a prompt apologetic reply, > these things *DO* still keep coming. And if there's some way to work > an opt-out list that isn't a PITA for the opted-outers, obviously the > folks at listbot haven't figured it out yet... > [it is always amusing to contemplate how/where spammers harvest > addresses from. this one is via cosell@bbn.com. There has not been > an email or usenet posting originated from this email address for >8 > years now (indeed, for all practical purposes, there was no "web" when > 'cosell@bbn.com' was last an active address!)... so where did they > even *FIND* it..] Well... lesse... a look at Dogpile found 140 hits for your address at Google alone, one of which was a spammers treasure trove, a note that included a "Mass acknowledgement of votes received for rec.crafts.misc:", as well as the jargon file 4.2 revision history. Infoseek found another 24 hits, all seemingly centered around the hackers dictionary. Lycos found 10 more hits - most of them Hackers Dictionary but some were in the Computer Risks Digest, Alta Vista found 33 hits, including a note in comp:compilers entitled, "Re: Perfect hashing table/function". The bottom line seems to be that the web and news groups never forget. I'll certainly agree that you should not be getting notes telling you that you can opt out of mailing lists to that address. But... is the flaw in "opt-out", or is the flaw in the person who harvested your address and the company that let their client use any address they dredged up? There seems to be something wrong at listbot... beyond whether they use opt-in or opt-out. Mike -- Mike Avery MAvery@mail.otherwhen.com (970)-642-0282 ICQ: 16241692 * Spam is for lusers who can't get business any other way * A Randomly Selected Thought For The Day: Desqview vs. Windows is a no-Win situation. From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 15:17:05 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA20004; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:51:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1167717E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:50:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [165.227.249.13] (ip13.proper.com [165.227.249.13]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA24550; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:54:54 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: phoffman@mail.imc.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200006261829.e5QIT8A00764@mail.rev.net> References: <200006261829.e5QIT8A00764@mail.rev.net> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:55:27 -0700 To: "Bernie Cosell" , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Paul Hoffman / IMC Subject: Re: The joys of opt-out Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 2:29 PM -0400 6/26/00, Bernie Cosell wrote: >You folks have told me that listbot.com isn't really a spam haven and >while email to 'abuse' there always gets me a prompt apologetic reply, >these things *DO* still keep coming. Then it does sound like listbot is a spam haven, for at least part of its existence. >[it is always amusing to contemplate how/where spammers harvest addresses >from. this one is via cosell@bbn.com. There has not been an email or >usenet posting originated from this email address for >8 years now >(indeed, for all practical purposes, there was no "web" when >'cosell@bbn.com' was last an active address!)... so where did they even >*FIND* it..] Well, searching on Google says: Google results 1-10 of about 298 for cosell@bbn.com. Search took 0.44 seconds --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 15:32:07 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA20038; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:56:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3D0917E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:56:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [165.227.249.13] (ip13.proper.com [165.227.249.13]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA24633; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 15:00:18 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: phoffman@mail.imc.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200006261941.e5QJfMf05401@mail.rev.net> References: <14679.34025.63535.676108@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> <200006261941.e5QJfMf05401@mail.rev.net> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 15:00:54 -0700 To: "Bernie Cosell" , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Paul Hoffman / IMC Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 3:41 PM -0400 6/26/00, Bernie Cosell wrote: >As for the message format, we could say some things about the underlying >machinery --- perhaps the biggest gripe I'd have is that MIME [AFAIK] >doesn't allow parts of the message to interact. See RFC 2557, which has been implemented in most current mail clients that handle HTML. >And of course, you'll then run into my biggest gripe aboue where all this >is going: the heir apparent to the enhanced-email encoding (once we redo >RFC822 et seq to make it _carry_ this stuff more gracefully) is HTML and >is the most depressing part. That's one view; another one is that it will be XML. Once we get XML schemas (and we have been waiting too many years for them), XML could be a great meta-format. But, as Chuck said, the cost of switching to a new mail system, even just for the message format, could outweigh the advantages. Don't forget the costs of doing everything twice during the transition. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 18:19:51 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA21727; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:47:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A0DC17E8C for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:47:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5R0puo03798; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:51:56 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200006261829.e5QIT8A00764@mail.rev.net> References: <200006261829.e5QIT8A00764@mail.rev.net> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:52:02 -0700 To: "Bernie Cosell" , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: The joys of opt-out Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 2:29 PM -0400 6/26/2000, Bernie Cosell wrote: >The list owner has included the following welcome message: > >[...] > >Also we would like to offer you a FREE vacation Certificate for 2 to >many exciting destinations as a thank you :) >to get your certificate please visit > [...more spam follows...] Listbot has a design problem, because they allow bulk loads without validation. That makes them open to abuse by spammers, and spammers have figured it out. I hope they fix this soon, because otherwise, they're going to be (and should be) shot. This isn't a big surprise, given that I believe this exact design flaw was brought up on this list a few months ago as a worry. It is also not an inherent problem with opt-out systems, but I'm not talking about opt-out systems here any more. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 18:33:35 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA21733; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:48:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA4C317E8D for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:47:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5R0pto03795; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:51:55 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20000626163238.A13822@gsp.org> References: <20000620063021.A7502@gsp.org> <20000621085222.A18336@gsp.org> <20000626111829.A9056@gsp.org> <20000626123259.A10148@gsp.org> <20000626130745.A10580@gsp.org> <20000626163238.A13822@gsp.org> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:49:32 -0700 To: Rich Kulawiec , Chuq Von Rospach From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 4:32 PM -0400 6/26/2000, Rich Kulawiec wrote: >No, you haven't. What you've been told is that opt-out == spamming, which >is correct--but you've refused to accept this. And because you don't >accept this very simple and very obvious point, because it's not true. And since some people on this list have this basic mis-assumption and refuse to discuss any possibility that it might not be true in some cases, we simply have nothing further to discuss about the issue, since I refuse to continue to be a target, and you continue to insist on nothing more than that we discuss this until you change my mind. There's no room for compromise on either side, so why bother? Show me the RFC that says it's spamming, and I'll look at it. Until you can show me the standard that says this, it's nothing more than your opinion, and I'm tired of being bludgeoned by it. I'm happy to discuss the issue. You're ont discussing. You're lecturing. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 18:42:44 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA21728; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:47:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9590B17E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:47:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5R0pto03792; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:51:55 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200006261941.e5QJfMf05401@mail.rev.net> References: <14679.34025.63535.676108@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> <200006261941.e5QJfMf05401@mail.rev.net> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:46:19 -0700 To: "Bernie Cosell" , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 3:41 PM -0400 6/26/2000, Bernie Cosell wrote: >Maybe... but one problem is that it only handles 'sections' and that's >pretty limiting [unless you use MIME *SOLELY* as a wrapper and then come >up with some other actual-message-format that you embed in a MIME >section]. Which is being done, both with text/html as part of a text/alternative, and with Qualcomm and their text/flowed stuff. >And of course, you'll then run into my biggest gripe aboue where all this >is going: the heir apparent to the enhanced-email encoding (once we redo >RFC822 et seq to make it _carry_ this stuff more gracefully) is HTML and >is the most depressing part. I tend to disagree. I think HTML is a bridge to something else, we just don't know what it is yet. HTML is simple and resiliant, if not always great. So it's fairly easy to use and implement. But if you look at the HTML space, everyone's running around looking for something better, whether it's DHTML, XML or fredML. Tehy just haven't agreed on what that is yet. I expect the same thing will happen in the e-mail space, trailing the HTML world. Or maybe it'll split and go sideways. As we continue to mainstream a broadband environment, an interesting argument could be made to move to a PDF-based imaging model. I'm not necessarily suggesting we do, and I certainly don't plan on leading the way, but PDF brings a lot of positives, the main negative being message size. And it's cross platform and pretty endemic out there. But I'm guessing we'll have 18 months or so breathing room before the next technological wave hits e-mail. Or maybe I'm just hoping. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 21:13:09 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id UAA23406; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 20:48:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ripco.com (pop2a.ripco.com [209.100.227.25]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7942117E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 20:48:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by ripco.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA17204 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:54:47 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <200006270354.WAA17204@ripco.com> Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:54:47 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Bernie Cosell wrote, | [W]hat you *can't* do in plain text is make use of any of the | information/communication enhancements that make text easier to read, | easier to apprehend, etc. I've yet ever to see HTML, RTF, nor any other fancy presentation used to make email easier to read or to understand. For web pages, yes, but never yet for email. It's used to call attention to the message, to show off the sender's purported design skills, or to give away that the sender doesn't know how to send plain text. Very often the choices involve foreground and background colors with very little contrast, nearly illegible fonts, or other things that make the content considerably more difficult to read. From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 21:37:11 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA23552; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 21:02:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 0874717E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 21:02:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 19948 invoked by uid 100); 27 Jun 2000 00:06:45 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 00:06:45 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Jim Trigg Cc: List-Managers list Subject: Re: spam packet routing In-Reply-To: <200006261603.MAA07811@marlborough.cnchost.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > And if more than one address is listed with abuse.net, how do I > decide which address to use? All of them. Regards, John Levine, postmaster@abuse.net, http://www.abuse.net, Trumansburg NY abuse.net postmaster From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 21:51:19 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id UAA23434; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 20:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from castro.queernet.org (castro.queernet.org [209.157.101.253]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C716217E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 20:53:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (rogerk@localhost) by castro.queernet.org (8.10.0.Beta6/8.10.0.Beta6) with ESMTP id e5R3vbc14760 Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 20:57:36 -0700 (PDT) From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" To: Chuq Von Rospach Cc: Rich Kulawiec , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: FYI -- above.net and RBL. 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 Mon, 26 Jun 2000, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > Show me the RFC that says it's spamming, and I'll look at it. Until > you can show me the standard that says this, it's nothing more than > your opinion, and I'm tired of being bludgeoned by it. I'm happy to > discuss the issue. You're ont discussing. You're lecturing. Do you dispute, then, that there is a difference between: - sending someone a message about how not to receive your marketing stuff that has no other content; and - sending someone a message about how not to receive your marketing stuff that has the first installment of your marketing stuff in it? -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE rogerk@QueerNet.ORG urgent: rogerk-page@QueerNet.ORG PO Box 14309 San Francisco, CA 94114 +1 415 ALL-ARFF "There is only one real blasphemy -- the refusal of joy!" -- Paul Rudnick From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 21:55:17 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA23727; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 21:21:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (unknown [63.92.26.236]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EE7217E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 21:21:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA04033 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 21:20:42 -0700 (PDT) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: The joys of opt-out In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:52:02 -0700. Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 21:20:42 -0700 Message-ID: <4031.962079642@monkeys.com> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >At 2:29 PM -0400 6/26/2000, Bernie Cosell wrote: >>The list owner has included the following welcome message: >> >>[...] >> >>Also we would like to offer you a FREE vacation Certificate for 2 to >>many exciting destinations as a thank you :) >>to get your certificate please visit >> [...more spam follows...] > >Listbot has a design problem, because they allow bulk loads without >validation. That makes them open to abuse by spammers, and spammers >have figured it out. I hope they fix this soon, because otherwise, >they're going to be (and should be) shot. You hope in vain I told them about this months ago. They clearly aren't going to do a damn thing about it until they get RBL'd. >This isn't a big surprise, given that I believe this exact design >flaw was brought up on this list a few months ago as a worry. It wasn't just a "woory". They spammed me. From list-managers-owner Mon Jun 26 22:26:27 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA23557; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 21:02:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from windlord.stanford.edu (windlord.Stanford.EDU [171.64.12.23]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 800C117E89 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 21:02:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 14289 invoked by uid 50); 27 Jun 2000 04:07:21 -0000 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME References: <14679.34025.63535.676108@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> <200006261941.e5QJfMf05401@mail.rev.net> In-Reply-To: Chuq Von Rospach's message of "Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:46:19 -0700" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 26 Jun 2000 21:07:21 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 37 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chuq Von Rospach writes: > Which is being done, both with text/html as part of a text/alternative, > and with Qualcomm and their text/flowed stuff. This is a somewhat pedantic correction, but it's actually important to a MIME parser. It's text/plain; format=flowed, not text/flowed. text/flowed would defeat the entire point, since it couldn't be treated as text/plain by MTAs that don't understand the format parameter. And it's not entirely correct to call it Qualcomm's, or at least any more correct than it is to call text/enriched Qualcomm's. It's a published RFC and is implemented by several other MUAs as well. > HTML is simple and resiliant, if not always great. So it's fairly easy > to use and implement. But if you look at the HTML space, everyone's > running around looking for something better, whether it's DHTML, XML or > fredML. Tehy just haven't agreed on what that is yet. I expect the same > thing will happen in the e-mail space, trailing the HTML world. Unfortunately, all of the alternatives people are playing with seem to also be SGML derivatives, which means we seem likely to continue to be stuck with one of the worst markup syntaxes ever designed by the mind of man. But don't mind me; I'm just bitter. > Or maybe it'll split and go sideways. As we continue to mainstream a > broadband environment, an interesting argument could be made to move to > a PDF-based imaging model. I'm not necessarily suggesting we do, and I > certainly don't plan on leading the way, but PDF brings a lot of > positives, the main negative being message size. And it's cross platform > and pretty endemic out there. The nice thing about PDF is that it really *is* a page layout language and gives you that sort of control without abusing HTML in order to do it. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 27 00:40:15 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id AAA25451; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 00:21:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.postmodern.com (server.postmodern.com [216.240.39.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4C4917E89 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 00:20:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postmodern.com (foucault.postmodern.com [216.240.39.5]) by server.postmodern.com (8.8.5/mcb-980201) with ESMTP id AAA02971; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 00:24:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <395856E2.287EEED8@postmodern.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 00:26:13 -0700 From: "Michael C. Berch" Reply-To: mcb@postmodern.com Organization: Postmodern Consulting, California USA X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "David W. Tamkin" Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME References: <200006270354.WAA17204@ripco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "David W. Tamkin" wrote: > > Bernie Cosell wrote, > > | [W]hat you *can't* do in plain text is make use of any of the > | information/communication enhancements that make text easier to read, > | easier to apprehend, etc. > > I've yet ever to see HTML, RTF, nor any other fancy presentation used > to make email easier to read or to understand. For web pages, yes, > but never yet for email. Disagree. One good example is a message that includes visual material, such as graphs or charts. A colleague recently took some MRTG graphs that documented the symptoms of a particular network problem, captioned them, overlaid some text as an annotation, and mailed them out in advance of a teleconference. Much better than mailing out his comments as text and trying to make reference to the MRTG graphs on a web page somewhere. -- Michael C. Berch mcb@postmodern.com From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 27 04:10:38 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id DAA00374; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 03:35:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from roscoe.burstmedia.com (gateway.machine.net [207.159.105.131]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1FC517E89 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 03:35:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by roscoe.burstmedia.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10) id ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 06:40:41 -0400 Message-ID: From: Bob McCown To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: RE: The joys of opt-out Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 06:40:40 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Then what's the solution to this? We dont want to alienate anyone bringing over a legitiimate 50k address list, yet we should do something for validation when someone does.... -+Bob -----Original Message----- From: Chuq Von Rospach [mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com] Sent: Monday, June 26, 2000 8:52 PM To: Bernie Cosell; list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: The joys of opt-out >Listbot has a design problem, because they allow bulk loads without >validation. That makes them open to abuse by spammers, and spammers >have figured it out. I hope they fix this soon, because otherwise, >they're going to be (and should be) shot. From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 27 07:42:48 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA02478; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 07:19:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0EB417E89 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 07:19:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5RENWo05484; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 07:23:32 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 07:18:30 -0700 To: Bob McCown , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: RE: The joys of opt-out Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 6:40 AM -0400 6/27/2000, Bob McCown wrote: >Then what's the solution to this? We dont want to alienate anyone bringing >over a legitiimate 50k address list, yet we should do something for >validation when someone does.... Good question. Not one I have a great answer for. I think the answer comes down to relationships, not technology -- listbot can't allow someone to bulk-load addresses in via their "transfer the list to listbot" mechanism unless (a) they've verified the load is legitimate, or (b) the admin has a track record with them. Unfortunately, this puts a real human being in the decision loop, not a computer. And that's expensive. But it's the only clean way to guarantee this can't happen. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 27 08:32:10 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id IAA03130; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 08:20:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 73C4817E89 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 08:20:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 3114 invoked by uid 100); 27 Jun 2000 11:25:25 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 11:25:25 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Bob McCown Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: RE: The joys of opt-out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Then what's the solution to this? We dont want to alienate anyone bringing > over a legitiimate 50k address list, yet we should do something for > validation when someone does.... Send a test mailing to a hundred, if no complaints after a day or two, another test mailing to another 200, wait a few days, then 500. If there still aren't any complaints, you're OK. This means that they can't use the list until five days after they bring it to you, but if they claim they need to mail to it right now, it's probably a spam list anyway. 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 Jun 27 09:57:15 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA03947; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 09:52:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ma-1.rootsweb.com (ma-1.rootsweb.com [209.192.148.153]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76DB517E89 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 09:52:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from twp@localhost) by ma-1.rootsweb.com (8.10.0.Beta10/8.10.0.Beta10) id e5RGu4C23197; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 12:56:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 12:56:04 -0400 From: Tim Pierce To: Chuq Von Rospach Cc: Bob McCown , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: The joys of opt-out Message-ID: <20000627125604.E17790@ma-1.rootsweb.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.7us In-Reply-To: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 07:18:30AM -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > > Good question. Not one I have a great answer for. I think the answer > comes down to relationships, not technology -- listbot can't allow > someone to bulk-load addresses in via their "transfer the list to > listbot" mechanism unless (a) they've verified the load is > legitimate, or (b) the admin has a track record with them. *Can* you verify that it's a legitimate transfer exclusively through human relationships, without sending probe notices to random list members? I suppose that you could write to the postmaster of the remote site to confirm that this person is actually moving a real list, but you'll probably not get a reply anyway, and what do you do then? Transferring a list from one site to another seems to me like a legitimate thing for a list manager to do. I don't think that it's unreasonable for the new list server to cope with that situation by sending probes that say "please confirm if you are actually subscribed to this list." -- Regards, Tim Pierce RootsWeb.com lead system admonsterator and Chief Hacking Officer From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 27 10:12:02 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA04433; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:04:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1BDA17E89 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:04:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from NY11014250B (kula [160.43.2.2]) by grassyhill.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA76227 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 13:07:54 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from tneff@panix.com) From: "Tom Neff" To: Subject: more on blocking/filtering MIME Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 13:07:38 -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 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <200006260800.BAA08376@honor.greatcircle.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Importance: Normal Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "Alan S. Harrell" wrote: > Don't we all have a responsibility to show them that their desire to > use HTML in e-mail is largely a brainwashing attempt by the commercial > element of the Internet in order to present more dynamic ad > presentations? We all understand that HTML in e-mail does not in any > way improve the actual content of the message... I don't think we "all have a responsibility" to teach such a thing, even if we believe it ourselves, which the responses (temperate and intemperate) to this thread demonstrate is not universally the case. Some list managers may adopt this as a personal mission and persevere with it, despite the fact that an increasing pie-slice of readers have no idea what they're talking about or why they should waste their time trying to comply. But most list managers, from what I have seen, are more interested in serving their underlying topic and community, e.g. vintage BMW owners or neutron star researchers, with a minimum of headache and a maximum of member satisfaction, than in waging these kinds of insider wars. (An unfortunate side effect of "meta discussion syndrome" is that meta-lists like this one tend disproportionately to attract those who DO have the energy to moonlight as MIMEWar commandos. If there were a truly representative way to canvass the working cohort of list admins out there in the world, some flame threads that look important here now would shrink to the size of styrofoam packing peanuts.) HTML mail may be a relatively recent development, but styled text, more generally, has been around for a while, and poses most of the same issues of size, incomprehensibility, and misuse. At least the HTML revolution has made picking through a digest full of RTF curlies or NROFF dotwords a relatively rare occurence! If you give message authors a style toolbar for bold, italic, red, green etc, they WILL tend to use it, and turn a deaf ear to fussbudget preachments that they "don't really need it." That's why I'd rather just strip it out. 95% of posters will NEVER KNOW that it was done anyway. One annoying thing that DEMIME and Lynx-ing doesn't address is when people, even in otherwise plain text messages, can't resist saying I put up the picture of the gooney bird on my site instead of just writing the URL in plain text where smart mailers can pick it up, and dumb printers and message strippers can preserve it for readers to click or type in. From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 27 10:27:04 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA04613; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:23:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (unknown [63.92.26.236]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C49517E89 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:23:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA55915; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:22:37 -0700 (PDT) To: Bob McCown Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: The joys of opt-out In-reply-to: Your message of Tue, 27 Jun 2000 06:40:40 -0400. Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:22:37 -0700 Message-ID: <55913.962126557@monkeys.com> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , you wrote: > >Then what's the solution to this? We dont want to alienate anyone bringing >over a legitiimate 50k address list, yet we should do something for >validation when someone does.... The solution is very simple. You just do some statistical quality control, just the same as any industrial production line would do. Just as they pull perhaps one in every 1,000 washing machines, toasters, circut boards, or whatever off the production line and then beat the hell out of it (to see if it is really good) YOU should pull perhaps one in every 1,000 addresses, at random, from some new list you are importing, and then run an automated script to mail a short message to each of those saying ``Did you explicitly opt-in to the XYZ mailing list?'' For most of these, you will either get no reply whatsoever or else a ``yes, I did'' reply. You can ignore those. However if you receive back any ``No, I didn't!'' replies, then you know you have a problem with that list, and you should in that case repeat the random sampling / statistical quality control procedure again, one more time. If you still get some ``No, I didn't'' replies, then you KNOW that you have a dirty list that some spammer is trying to get you to send to. This isn't rocket science. Nor is any of this a new concept. Random sampling for statistical quality control purposes had a long history going back at least 50 years or more. These basic (and rather obvious) techniques are only considered new and/or revolutionary in the world ofi selective broadcast electronic communications (e.g. via e-mail lists). The problem isn't how to do quality control for mailing lists. The problem is finding the corporate WILL to do it within the mailing list companies. From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 27 10:42:05 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA04708; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:33:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ripco.com (pop2a.ripco.com [209.100.227.25]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63C2017E89 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:33:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by ripco.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA28584 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 12:39:37 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <200006271739.MAA28584@ripco.com> Subject: Re: blocking/filtering MIME Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 12:39:36 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <395856E2.287EEED8@postmodern.com> from "Michael C. Berch" at Jun 27, 2000 12:26:13 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I had written, T> I've yet ever to see HTML, RTF, nor any other fancy presentation used T> to make email easier to read or to understand. For web pages, yes, T> but never yet for email. Michael Berch responded, B> Disagree. You disagree with my statement that I've never seen it? B> One good example is a message that includes visual material, B> such as graphs or charts. A colleague recently took some MRTG graphs B> that documented the symptoms of a particular network problem, captioned B> them, overlaid some text as an annotation, and mailed them out in B> advance of a teleconference. Much better than mailing out his comments B> as text and trying to make reference to the MRTG graphs on a web page B> somewhere. Let me ask this: were there recipients without HTTP or FTP access? If not, how was pictorial email "much better than" (or any better than) a single-part text message supplying a URL to "a web page somewhere"? That's not a chal- lenge: it's an honest question, because with what little I know I just do not see the benefit, except for those recipients (if any) who could use neither HTTP nor FTP. It sounds worse to me: every recipient of the message had to take all the graph data, but had he sent just a URL, those who neither needed or wished to see the graphs would not have had to receive them, and others could get the data by HTTP rather than by SMTP or POP3, without the MIME- wrapping and 7-bit encoding. Even if pictorial email was the best way to distribute those graphs, let's not overlook that the example is a rare exception amid all the email where additional parts, fancy formatting, and extra encoding are content-free bloat (or sometimes content-detracting bloat, as when the font is too small or too ornate, the color contrast is insufficient, or the background interferes with the foreground). If an act is good once out of every 10,000,000 times it is done while it's bad 9,999,999 times, that may be a different problem from its being uniformly bad, but there's still a problem. From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 27 11:24:32 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA05040; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 11:02:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3A9117E89 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 11:02:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5RI6Qo05877; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 11:06:26 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20000627125604.E17790@ma-1.rootsweb.com> References: <20000627125604.E17790@ma-1.rootsweb.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:56:20 -0700 To: Tim Pierce , Chuq Von Rospach From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: The joys of opt-out Cc: Bob McCown , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:56 PM -0400 6/27/2000, Tim Pierce wrote: >*Can* you verify that it's a legitimate transfer exclusively >through human relationships, without sending probe notices >to random list members? 100%? No. But the simple fact that they have to contact a human and have the transfer approved will stop all but the most brazen spammers, because the reason this works is that they can do it anonymously, via hotmail or some other free email service, and disappear into the night. Put even a tiny amount of accountability into the system and it breaks the link. >Transferring a list from one site to another seems to me like >a legitimate thing for a list manager to do. I don't think that >it's unreasonable for the new list server to cope with that situation >by sending probes that say "please confirm if you are actually >subscribed to this list." This is something Michelle Dick has been doing, I believe, and can speak about it intelligently. There are legitimate reasons why you might not (as the owner transferring a list) want contact with the old site admin, but that doesn't mean there aren't ways to validate a list. Personally, I'd solve this by setting up some way to validate the list owner if they want to transfer a list in -- that keeps the liability of the validity of the list from ending up on the site instead of the owner, saving you amazing hassle. And forcing the owner to be non-anonymous and therefore traceable in a case of spamming would keep the spammers from using the system. It also means you only have to validate the admin once, no matter how many lists they transfer. The problem, unfortunately, isn't just the bulk-load capability for list transfers, but that combined with the easy accessibility of anonymous e-mail addresses. The spammer can create an identity long enough to use the service to send a spam, and fade into the dust again. Break any of those links and you kill the problem. The easiest link, from an administrative view (IMHO) is simply make the admin non-anonymous, because the spammers won't allow that to happen, and will go elsewhere looking for ways to spam. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 27 12:25:03 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA05548; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 11:56:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ripco.com (pop2a.ripco.com [209.100.227.25]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAD4917E89 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 11:56:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by ripco.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA02683; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 14:03:03 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <200006271903.OAA02683@ripco.com> Subject: Re: The joys of opt-out To: rmccown@burstmedia.com (Bob McCown) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 14:03:03 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: from "Bob McCown" at Jun 27, 2000 06:40:40 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Bob McCown asked, | Then what's the solution to this? We dont want to alienate anyone bringing | over a legitiimate 50k address list, yet we should do something for | validation when someone does.... You probably won't like my answer, but you should make transfers and all other listowner-originated additions opt-in. If the victim, er, potential subscriber wants to join, he or she needs to reply; no response means no subscription and no further mail. A listowner moving to ListBot with 50,000 addresses should get the fish-eye, not the red carpet. Yes, there are legitimate opt-in mailing lists that have that many subscribers, but by now the spammers outnumber them. If you see multiple variants of a single address among the 50,000, then you know for sure that it's phony. And if the listowner complains, "but I'll lose mem- bers!" ask why (s)he wants to keep sending mail to people who don't want it or who aren't interested enough in it to say yes to it. Just yesterday, for the second time, three obsolete, deprecated forms of another email address of mine, not given out by me since 1996 and all in disuse before I had HTTP access, were added to a single ListBot list and sent a welcome letter that informed me I had opted in by having done busi- ness with the listowner (who gave neither a name nor an email address [ex- cept listname-owner@listbot.com] nor any other indication of who it was or what business of its I had purportedly patronized). Clearly bull. And, while I've seen people so interested in a list that they subscribe more than one of their own addresses to it (for example, a work address to keep up with it during business hours plus a personal address to keep up with it outside business hours), why on earth would I ask for three subscriptions that end up in the same mailbox, even to a list that I want? As anyone on list-managers can see, those three addresses of mine were on a very old spam target list, and this listowner was just adding every address it had ever heard of. We just had a similar discussion on a list devoted to running lists on eGroups. The MAPS people are threatening them with being RBLed unless they disable the opt-out add facility; invitations and opt-in additions are ac- ceptable to them but not the opt-out type. The position I expressed there is that somewhere one has to draw a line between minor and major changes in a list. I've done a couple of each (list-managers will be spared the details) and have just moved the membership rolls for the minor changes but have re- quired opt-in consent for the major ones, such that declining to respond meant not being there after the change. When a list is moved from a private setup to a big listhost or from one big listhost to another, the facilities and policies of the new host will dictate so much about the way the list runs that in my view it's a major change and subscribers should need to confirm their willingness to stick around. It's just not the same as the list they joined. At the very least, when someone claims to have an established mailing list, investigate. See whether the various lists of lists had an entry for it when it was at its old host; see whether there are archives at its old host; see whether the old host's administrators will confirm its having run there. One suggestion in the discussion regarding the opt-out problem at eGroups was to take a sampling of the addresses that the listowner wants to add -- the list- owner should provide the entire set of addresses and the listhost should do the sampling -- and send them opt-in messages. If the results have too many bounces, proactive refusals, or failures to respond, reject the list. There should need to be a significant number of acceptances (a handful may indicate that the list was temporarily sprinkled with addresses that reach the owner) and only a few bounces (too many would show that the list is not pruned, typical of spammers); allowing for a couple "I never joined any such list" responses that might be lies from disgruntled members or mistakes by forget- ful ones, proactive refusals should be few to none and should be silent of complaints or even state that yes, they did join, but they've recently lost interest. Again, that requires human work-hours from the listhost staff. The only automated way that doesn't welcome spammers is to get rid of opt- out addition. From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 27 12:37:43 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA05738; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 12:11:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ripco.com (pop2a.ripco.com [209.100.227.25]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26BD817E89 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 12:11:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by ripco.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA03630; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 14:18:04 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <200006271918.OAA03630@ripco.com> Subject: Re: more on blocking/filtering MIME To: tneff@panix.com (Tom Neff) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 14:18:03 -0500 (CDT) Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: from "Tom Neff" at Jun 27, 2000 01:07:38 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Tom Neff wrote, | One annoying thing that DEMIME and Lynx-ing doesn't address is when people, | even in otherwise plain text messages, can't resist saying | | I put up the picture of the gooney bird on my site | | instead of just writing the URL in plain text where smart mailers can pick | it up, and dumb printers and message strippers can preserve it for readers | to click or type in. That's done to accommodate readers on AOL, whose mail client will not show the URL as a clickable link otherwise, or so people say. From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 27 13:51:33 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA06598; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 13:36:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF51617E89 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 13:36:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA20362 ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 13:45:30 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200006271903.OAA02683@ripco.com> References: <200006271903.OAA02683@ripco.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 13:40:06 -0700 To: "David W. Tamkin" , rmccown@burstmedia.com (Bob McCown) From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: The joys of opt-out Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 2:03 PM -0500 6/27/2000, David W. Tamkin wrote: >You probably won't like my answer, but you should make transfers and all >other listowner-originated additions opt-in. If the victim, er, potential >subscriber wants to join, he or she needs to reply; no response means no >subscription and no further mail. That's a good idea, but there's a bit of a twist here. The problem with the listbot stuff is that the list owner can make the transfer and post to it immediately. To circumvent that problem, Listbot could allow an admin to bulk-load addresses, but they'd have to send out a standard opt-in message with very (VERY!) limited customization capbilities, and users wouldn't get any e-mail from the list until they opted in. Right now, the spam coming out of listbot is being sent as part of the "welcome to listbot, your olist has been moved" message, so you can't let the admin customize it that much. Basically, a "welcome/opt-in" message that tells people what the list name is, what the previous address is, who the admin (and admin e-mail) are, would circumvent this problem as well, but even allowing something like 256 characters of explanation would allow the spammers to tweak the system. But if the opt-in message was strictly limited and not under the control of the admin, it'd work. >in the same mailbox, even to a list that I want? As anyone on list-managers >can see, those three addresses of mine were on a very old spam target list, >and this listowner was just adding every address it had ever heard of. that's another thing they could do, of course, which is track known "bunny" bogus addresses that end up in all of the spamholes, and if they appear in the bulk-load, freeze the list for further investigation. Ditto if the bulk-load is bigger than some number -- there are any number of heuristics that could be used to sniff-test a list of addresses, whether it's "50,000 addresses" or "10,000 addresses from a hotmail address" or "yet another subscription to president@whitehouse.gov"... Build some kind of scoring system, and refer anything with a score above "foo" to a person for evaluation. I'd start with, say, any bulk load > 100 addresses that comes from a free e-mail address.... There are lots of way to intelligently limit the risk. I think you need opt-in for discussion lists in any event, but any time you have insecure or untrusted data, you have to protect yourself and the people your site might affect. That means either spending the time to trust the data, or use a system like opt-in to limit the impact. Frankly, whenever a list is moved, I think it's usually a good idea to referesh the list anyway, help everyone get their addresses updated, etc, etc. So opt-ins are a good idea, since it also gives people who just aren't that interested but haven't gotten around to leaving an easy out. The people who want to be on the list will join the new list; the rest, if they don't want to be there, why force them onto it? -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Tue Jun 27 21:38:15 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA10707; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 21:11:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mds1.mastnet.net (mds1.mastnet.net [206.65.193.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B6B617E8C for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 21:10:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 0d8xk (ppp-193.lake-jackson.mastnet.net [206.66.213.193]) by mds1.mastnet.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA01289 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:10:02 -0500 From: "Alan S. Harrell" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 23:15:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: more on blocking/filtering MIME Reply-To: ASHandRR@mastnet.net Message-ID: <39593599.16194.11829D1@localhost> In-reply-to: References: <200006260800.BAA08376@honor.greatcircle.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 27 Jun 2000, 13:07, Tom Neff wrote: > I don't think we "all have a responsibility" to teach such a thing, even > if we believe it ourselves, which the responses (temperate and > intemperate) to this thread demonstrate is not universally the case. To any issue you feel strongly about, you have a greater chance of swaying the masses by speaking up than remaining mute. However, as I alluded earlier, most of the anti-text crowd on this list are lost causes. They are guided by greed and avarice and there is little I can do to dissuade them. I can, however, have a great influence on newcomers to the Internet and novice list owners. I have indeed, through the years, convinced many that HTML, RTF and all the other non-text documentation methods, are poor choices for e-mail discussion lists. To effect that kind of loyalty to one's cause, you must position yourself as a leader and a teacher. You must be willing to take the time to guide your subscribers into using their e-mail as you believe it best be utilized - especially in the context of a discussion mailing list. > Some list managers may adopt this as a personal mission and persevere > with it, despite the fact that an increasing pie-slice of readers have > no idea what they're talking about or why they should waste their time > trying to comply. I like to take a little more optimistic view of my subscribers. Yes, it does take time to convince newcomers to the importance of list etiquette values. I can remember that in my early years, I rebelled against the same values that I teach today. I fully expect many I try to reach will rebel against my ideals, but like myself, if they continuously hear the same teachings over and over from many sources, then it will finally sink in, as it did with me. I would hope, for this to all sink in, that I am not the only voice they hear. > But most list managers, from what I have seen, are more interested in > serving their underlying topic and community, e.g. vintage BMW owners > or neutron star researchers, with a minimum of headache and a maximum > of member satisfaction, than in waging these kinds of insider wars. If you don't maintain the vehicle, it falls apart eventually. Constant maintenance is a job of every list owner, in order to preserve the quality and purpose of the "underlying topic and community," as you so eloquently put it. > (An unfortunate side effect of "meta discussion syndrome" is that > meta-lists like this one tend disproportionately to attract those who > DO have the energy to moonlight as MIMEWar commandos. If there were > a truly representative way to canvass the working cohort of list > admins out there in the world, some flame threads that look important > here now would shrink to the size of styrofoam packing peanuts.) Well, in my mind, the truest test would be to ask all proponents of HTML mail this question: "If all outgoing e-mail were postage pre-paid per piece by the sender based on "weight" -- weight defined by size in bytes, rather than the costs being borne by the receiver, AND/OR the receiver could refuse any e-mail sent to it and return it to sender, whereby the sender was required to pay for that piece of returned e-mail by "weight", would you then opt to send all your e-mail by text or by HTML? Imagine sending 10,000 opt-in newsletters to your customers and upon hitting the SEND button, you're e-mail client relays back a message from your provider, "The charge for this distribution will be $500 for HTML; $350.00 for RTF; $49.99 for plain text. Please enter choice and then enter your credit card number." The senders of HTML mail do not pay for their actions anywhere near the burden of costs endured by the receivers. I fervently believe this is wrong. Text e-mail is the closest thing we have today, to equal accountability on both ends of an e-mail transport. That alone is the best argument to it's favor. > HTML mail may be a relatively recent development, but styled text, more > generally, has been around for a while, and poses most of the same > issues of size, incomprehensibility, and misuse. At least the HTML > revolution has made picking through a digest full of RTF curlies or > NROFF dotwords a relatively rare occurence! HTML is a wonderful invention, but it was made for the WWW and web browsers - not e-mail. It must be MIME contorted to send with e-mail. In fact, it really is not e-mail at all. It is an attachment to e- mail, much like a leech or a tick. It is in our browsers where HTML shines. We need not send out bandwidth hogging e-mail messages full of HTML, when all that would suffice is one clickable URL that would open the browser to a web site with the document that in display. We can do that in a text message. I was at a web site of a well known newsletter a few minutes before beginning this response. It made me sick to read that he only offers HTML newsletters because he could not get his precious banner ads in a text newsletter and thus could not get his money from his unwitting subscribers. When I read things like this, it infuriates me. I currently own four mailing lists for which I pay for three of them out of my own pocket, along with a contracted web hosting service to serve the subscribers of these lists and in the past I have owned two other lists, making six lists in all. I have never, ever made a single dime from any of them. I have never distributed ads that I sold in any list message or newsletter. I have never had banner ads at any web site I owned, for which I received remuneration. I am just a blue collar worker who pays for all of this out of his own hard working pocket. And I ask myself every day, if I can do this, why can't every other listowner? Why must you distribute a newsletter at a cost to your subscribers instead of generously bearing the costs yourself. I wonder if that listowner of that newsletter would send his newsletter letter out as HTML were he to pay for every click upon the banner, rather than receiving money for the exposures. > If you give message authors a style toolbar for bold, italic, red, green > etc, they WILL tend to use it, and turn a deaf ear to fussbudget > preachments that they "don't really need it." Not me. I can remember first seeing this in...ah...I think it was AOL and then shortly after that, Eudora 3 came out with it. My e-mail girlfriend and I exchanged a couple of RTF's and I thought it was kind of novel for about 2 e-mails. After that, I realized that it was all problematic, klutzy, and very soon, boring. Most of all, our communications were suffering. We would spend more time arranging the font than developing our thoughts. It quickly dawned on me, that RTF was about the ugliest e-mail I had ever seen. I also had a stint working with a large contingency in the world that only had e-mail as their only access to the Internet and for them, HTML was not only an annoyance, it was an affront. I've also worked a little with the blind. I know from that experience that HTML e-mail can cause a lot of problems for them. Few would opt for HTML e-mail over text. I remember once working several weeks with a blind Englishman who used ELM as his e-mail client. I ask you, what is he supposed to do when HTML arrives in his inbox? Would the senders of HTML be willing to "walk a mile in his shoes" and just use ELM or Pine as their e-mail clients? Perhaps they could write their HTML newsletters, blindfolded? > That's why I'd rather just strip it out. 95% of posters will NEVER KNOW > that it was done anyway. That's fine. They give us that feature at eGroups. For my Majordomo's I bounce them, which is better in my way of thinking. My MJ list subscribers learn that if they want to post to my lists, they must configure their mail clients to only send in text. And I stand ready to help them do just that. My idea is to get them to configure their clients to text only in hopes that it will stay that way for them, most of the time. I want them to set it as HTML only after considering the possible adverse affects of their actions. With eGroups striping the HTML, my egroups subscribers merrily keep sending e-mail out as HTML. In this manner, I don't have nearly the impact upon their future e-mail habits as I do with my Majordomos. > One annoying thing that DEMIME and Lynx-ing doesn't address is when > people, even in otherwise plain text messages, can't resist saying > > I put up the picture of the gooney bird on my > site > > instead of just writing the URL in plain text where smart mailers can > pick it up, and dumb printers and message strippers can preserve it for > readers to click or type in. Yes. The AOL influence. I don't bother with the double URLs, myself. It always struck me as a waste of good bytes. It also annoys me to get newsletters where half the newsletter is written for standard protocols and then the newsletter is repeated again for AOL subscribers. Can you imagine if every single e-mail you received was in two languages? :-) Were AOL subscribers the majority on any list I owned, then I would accommodate them. Still, if you are a seller of a product and you want to reach the largest audience, you kowtow to AOL. So next time you see the "A HREF URL", just consider that the sender is kissing A**. People do that for money, you know. Alan ASHandRR@MASTNET.net > > From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 28 06:26:19 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id GAA18408; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 06:10:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu (postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu [132.236.56.10]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDE2F17E89 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 06:10:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.253.230.42] (murmer.cit.cornell.edu [128.253.230.42]) by postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA04520 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 09:15:28 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: tco2@postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu Message-Id: Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 09:15:30 -0400 To: list-managers-digest@GreatCircle.COM From: Todd Olson Subject: RE: The joys of opt-out Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi >Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 06:40:40 -0400 >From: Bob McCown >Subject: RE: The joys of opt-out > >Then what's the solution to this? We dont want to alienate anyone bringing >over a legitiimate 50k address list, yet we should do something for >validation when someone does.... > >- -+Bob Here at Cornell, when a list is renamed, or when the owners seek to transfer from Cornell to elsewhere, or to Cornell from elsewhere we advise the following. 1) Set up the new list, *without* any subscribers 2) On the *existing* list send out a message saying that the list is being rehosted. Invite all interested parties to subscribe to the new list (and unsubscribe from the old list). Specify the date at which the old list will be shutdown, perhaps 2 weeks or 4 weeks hence, depending on the likelyhood of vacations and such. 3) As appropriate, send out reminders on the old list about the impending shutdown and the location of the new list 4) Make sure related website point to the new list 5) At the stated deadline, shutdown the old list. The virtues of this approach are a) it is opt in b) subscriber addresses that are multiply forwarded are cleaned up, reducing the maintanence of the list c) subscribers develop a kinesetic memory of the fact that the listname has changed (ie the domain has changed) because they had to do something. This greatly reduces support queries in the long run, due to name confusion. And also reduces claims of spamming. d) People that using filters will not be able to easily overlook that they need to redo their filters ... this reduces user grumbling at a later date. So far I have not encountered any negatives in this approach. Regards, Todd Olson Cornell E-Mail-List Server Admin Team From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 28 07:11:23 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id GAA18848; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 06:58:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F1DA17E89 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 06:58:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5SE2wo08329 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 07:02:59 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 06:59:26 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: yahoo buys egroups... Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk hit the wire today, Yahoo is buying egroups for $428 million in stock. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 28 11:00:54 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA21475; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 10:51:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sws5.ctd.ornl.gov (sws5.ctd.ornl.gov [160.91.68.105]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 95BBA17E89 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 10:50:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 272443 invoked by uid 3995); 28 Jun 2000 17:55:51 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14682.15398.827603.514221@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:55:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Dave Sill To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: yahoo buys egroups... In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 "20 Minutes to Nikko" XEmacs Lucid (patch 2) Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak Ridge, Tenn., USA X-Face: "p~Q]mg{;e*}YR|)&Q/&Q\*~5UWfZX34;5M wrote: >hit the wire today, Yahoo is buying egroups for $428 million in stock. That's insane. -Dave From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 28 13:07:55 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA22520; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:42:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8975017E89 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:42:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA46652 ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:51:57 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <14682.15398.827603.514221@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> References: <14682.15398.827603.514221@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:29:16 -0700 To: Dave Sill , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: yahoo buys egroups... Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 1:55 PM -0400 6/28/00, Dave Sill wrote: > >hit the wire today, Yahoo is buying egroups for $428 million in stock. > >That's insane. the money? Actually, probably not. I think it's an interesting purchase, myself. But IMHO what is interesting for list-managers is the change in ownership, in that yahoo is a lot more clueful (IMHO) than egroups, so this is a good thing in terms of who owns and manages that resource. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 28 13:10:46 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA22671; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:57:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sws5.ctd.ornl.gov (sws5.ctd.ornl.gov [160.91.68.105]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 74DBB17E89 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:57:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 248504 invoked by uid 3995); 28 Jun 2000 20:01:54 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14682.22961.466153.65385@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 16:01:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Dave Sill To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: yahoo buys egroups... In-Reply-To: References: <14682.15398.827603.514221@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 "20 Minutes to Nikko" XEmacs Lucid (patch 2) Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak Ridge, Tenn., USA X-Face: "p~Q]mg{;e*}YR|)&Q/&Q\*~5UWfZX34;5M wrote: >At 1:55 PM -0400 6/28/00, Dave Sill wrote: > >> >hit the wire today, Yahoo is buying egroups for $428 million in stock. >> >>That's insane. > >the money? Yeah, the money. >Actually, probably not. I think it's an interesting >purchase, myself. Nearly half a *billion* dollars for a handful of servers and a pile of mailing lists? I'm glad I'm not a Yahoo stockholder. It's all funny money, I guess. >But IMHO what is interesting for list-managers is the change in >ownership, in that yahoo is a lot more clueful (IMHO) than egroups, >so this is a good thing in terms of who owns and manages that >resource. Well, MHO differs with yours. I've been pretty impressed with egroups, but I find Yahoo's web fronting for various mom-and-pop retailers to be rather lame. And there portal/search engine sucks, too. :-) -Dave From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 28 14:10:50 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA23522; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:01:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B88F17E89 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:01:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.193] (A17-216-27-193.apple.com [17.216.27.193]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA27304 ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:10:36 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <14682.22961.466153.65385@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> References: <14682.15398.827603.514221@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> <14682.22961.466153.65385@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:05:18 -0700 To: Dave Sill , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: yahoo buys egroups... Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 4:01 PM -0400 6/28/00, Dave Sill wrote: >Nearly half a *billion* dollars for a handful of servers and a pile of >mailing lists? and the existing operations on them, the software that runs them, and the brand that sits on them. >Well, MHO differs with yours. I've been pretty impressed with egroups, egroups is fine -- didn't mean to imply they were bad. But yahoo is clueful in a big way. > And there portal/search engine sucks, too. :-) did you see the deal where they've signed to replace inktomi with google? I think they agreed with you. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 28 14:56:34 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA23989; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:47:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9BB1817E89 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:46:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 7512 invoked by uid 100); 28 Jun 2000 17:51:52 -0400 Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 17:51:52 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Dave Sill Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: yahoo buys egroups... In-Reply-To: <14682.22961.466153.65385@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > >> >hit the wire today, Yahoo is buying egroups for $428 million in stock. > >> > >>That's insane. > > > >the money? > > Yeah, the money. No money involved, that's fluffy puffy YHOO stock. 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 Jun 28 16:25:53 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA25069; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 16:15:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from larryboy.graphics.cornell.edu (larryboy.graphics.cornell.edu [128.84.247.48]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CE4317E89 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 16:15:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from larryboy.graphics.cornell.edu (mkc@localhost) by larryboy.graphics.cornell.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA87131; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 19:20:17 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mkc@larryboy.graphics.cornell.edu) Message-Id: <200006282320.TAA87131@larryboy.graphics.cornell.edu> To: John R Levine Cc: Dave Sill , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: yahoo buys egroups... In-Reply-To: Message from John R Levine of "Wed, 28 Jun 2000 17:51:52 EDT." Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 19:20:17 -0400 From: Mitch Collinsworth Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >> >> >hit the wire today, Yahoo is buying egroups for $428 million in stock. >> >> >> >>That's insane. >> > >> >the money? >> >> Yeah, the money. > >No money involved, that's fluffy puffy YHOO stock. Hey, I'd gladly turn over my lists to them for that much fluffy puffy! -Mitch From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 28 16:40:52 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA25256; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 16:35:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.vnet.net (smtp2.vnet.net [166.82.1.32]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70E7917E89 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 16:35:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by smtp2.vnet.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5SNe7J16903 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 19:40:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA16817 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 19:40:07 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 19:40:06 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: yahoo buys egroups... 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 Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > But IMHO what is interesting for list-managers is the change > in ownership, in that yahoo is a lot more clueful (IMHO) than > egroups, so this is a good thing in terms of who owns and > manages that resource. Yahoo has been one of the fastest at closing spam dropboxes. They host a bunch of on-web forums that they call clubs. Does Yahoo have any history with mailing lists? - murr - From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 28 17:55:49 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA26184; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 17:46:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from castro.queernet.org (castro.queernet.org [209.157.101.253]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B448B17E89 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 17:46:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (rogerk@localhost) by castro.queernet.org (8.10.0.Beta6/8.10.0.Beta6) with ESMTP id e5T0p4Q08253 Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 17:51:04 -0700 (PDT) From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" To: Mitch Collinsworth Cc: John R Levine , Dave Sill , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: yahoo buys egroups... In-Reply-To: <200006282320.TAA87131@larryboy.graphics.cornell.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Mitch Collinsworth wrote: > Hey, I'd gladly turn over my lists to them for that much fluffy puffy! It's not lists, it's having the brand that means "lists" -- ahem, "communities" -- to Joe and Jane 56KPack. I can't tell you how many times people have told me they had set up, or had joined, a "onelist" or an "egroup". (Oh, well, I guess "listserv" has company in Genericville now.) -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE rogerk@QueerNet.ORG urgent: rogerk-page@QueerNet.ORG PO Box 14309 San Francisco, CA 94114 +1 415 ALL-ARFF "There is only one real blasphemy -- the refusal of joy!" -- Paul Rudnick From list-managers-owner Wed Jun 28 19:10:53 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA26858; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 18:56:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from beatrice.rutgers.edu (beatrice.rutgers.edu [165.230.209.226]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87F8717E89 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 18:55:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from puck2.rutgers.edu (puck2.rutgers.edu [165.230.209.234]) by beatrice.rutgers.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA21565; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 22:13:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from easmith@localhost) by puck2.rutgers.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA24770; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 22:13:31 -0400 (EDT) From: "Allen Smith" Message-Id: <10006282213.ZM24849@puck2.rutgers.edu> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 22:13:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: murr rhame "Re: yahoo buys egroups..." (Jun 28, 9:56pm) References: X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.3 08feb96 MediaMail) To: murr rhame , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: yahoo buys egroups... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Jun 28, 9:56pm, murr rhame wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > > > But IMHO what is interesting for list-managers is the change > > in ownership, in that yahoo is a lot more clueful (IMHO) than > > egroups, so this is a good thing in terms of who owns and > > manages that resource. > > Yahoo has been one of the fastest at closing spam dropboxes. > They host a bunch of on-web forums that they call clubs. Yes, and they've got a reasonably good record regarding free speech in most respects, so far as I know. However, I am somewhat concerned with their record regarding subpoenas for identities et al - they tend to give in to them even when the subpoena in question is legally dubious and quite fightable in court by the target. I'm concerned about this because I'm an admin for a lyris list (see http://www.iislists.com/scripts/lyris.pl?enter=uupoly), which we've been looking at moving onto egroups for various reasons (including the availability of a lot more other potential admins - people seem to have problems with the learning curve necessary for lyris administration, among other things). It's on a somewhat controversial topic, namely polyamory, so privacy is a concern. Anyone have any information about this? Thanks, -Allen -- Allen Smith easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 29 04:30:35 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id EAA04661; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 04:15:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from roscoe.burstmedia.com (gateway.machine.net [207.159.105.131]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BBB217E89 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 04:15:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by roscoe.burstmedia.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10) id ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 07:21:03 -0400 Message-ID: From: Bob McCown To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: RE: yahoo buys egroups... Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 07:20:59 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Does anyone know offhand how many addresses the eGroups/OneList juggernaut maintains? -=Bob -----Original Message----- From: murr rhame [mailto:murr@vnet.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 7:40 PM To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: yahoo buys egroups... On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > But IMHO what is interesting for list-managers is the change > in ownership, in that yahoo is a lot more clueful (IMHO) than > egroups, so this is a good thing in terms of who owns and > manages that resource. Yahoo has been one of the fastest at closing spam dropboxes. They host a bunch of on-web forums that they call clubs. Does Yahoo have any history with mailing lists? - murr - From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 29 04:42:26 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id EAA04767; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 04:28:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mds1.mastnet.net (mds1.mastnet.net [206.65.193.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5545E17E89 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 04:28:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 0d8xk (ppp-180.lake-jackson.mastnet.net [206.66.213.180]) by mds1.mastnet.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id GAA15871 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 06:27:28 -0500 From: "Alan S. Harrell" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 06:33:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: yahoo buys egroups... Reply-To: ASHandRR@mastnet.net Message-ID: <395AEDA5.442.4D63A9@localhost> In-reply-to: <10006282213.ZM24849@puck2.rutgers.edu> References: murr rhame "Re: yahoo buys egroups..." (Jun 28, 9:56pm) X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 28 Jun 2000, 22:13, Allen Smith wrote: > I'm concerned about this because I'm an admin for a lyris list > (see http://www.iislists.com/scripts/lyris.pl?enter=uupoly), which > we've been looking at moving onto egroups for various reasons > (including the availability of a lot more other potential > admins - people seem to have problems with the learning curve > necessary for lyris administration, among other things). It's on a > somewhat controversial topic, namely polyamory, so privacy is a > concern. > > Anyone have any information about this? At eGroups you can designate your list as private and thus not have it appear in the public database. You can hide your archives from the public and just make available to your list members or just yourself. You can hide other features such as your files or calendar area. As to the privacy guarantees eGroups themselves provides you, you will just have to read their Privacy Statement and then if you have Good Faith in that statement, you accept it. As to the difficulty your list members have had with Lyris, have you made a web site interface with list administration forms for those who are e-mail challenged? It sort of has become obligatory for list owners today to have a web site supporting their lists that includes some type of subscription form. Alan ASHandRR@MASTNET.net From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 29 07:27:16 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA06416; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 07:17:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newboy.plaidworks.com (a203.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.203]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CD6C17E89 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 07:17:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by newboy.plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5TEMGo11607 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 07:22:16 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: chuqui@newboy.plaidworks.com Message-Id: Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 07:22:37 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: egroups numbers.. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk For whoever asked, according to the SJ Merc this morning, egroups suppports 800,000 groups with about 17 million members (doesn't say if that's total subscriptions or unique addresses, but implies the latter) -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Jun 29 11:57:50 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA08916; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:40:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9E3A917E89 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:40:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 26439 invoked by uid 100); 29 Jun 2000 14:45:47 -0400 Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:45:47 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Chuq Von Rospach Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: egroups numbers.. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > For whoever asked, according to the SJ Merc this morning, egroups > suppports 800,000 groups with about 17 million members (doesn't say > if that's total subscriptions or unique addresses, but implies the > latter) Those numbers were from their press release. It makes it pretty clear that 17 million is "users", different people. Other reports say that they're adding 1.5 million users/month, and sending 2 billion messages/month, and eGroups is a real Internet company and loses pots of money, something like $12M loss on under $4M revenue for the latest six months. It also points out that Yahoo has 145 million users, so if they can encourage even a modest fraction of them to sign up for eGroups lists, that's a heck of a lot of spam^H^H^H^H opt-mostly-in mail. 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 Jun 29 13:57:10 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA10234; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:50:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from beatrice.rutgers.edu (beatrice.rutgers.edu [165.230.209.226]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A506517E89 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:50:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from puck2.rutgers.edu (puck2.rutgers.edu [165.230.209.234]) by beatrice.rutgers.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA28046; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 17:08:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from easmith@localhost) by puck2.rutgers.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA18505; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 17:08:36 -0400 (EDT) From: "Allen Smith" Message-Id: <10006291708.ZM18549@puck2.rutgers.edu> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 17:08:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: "Alan S. Harrell" "Re: yahoo buys egroups..." (Jun 29, 9:53am) References: murr rhame "Re: yahoo buys egroups..." (Jun 28 9:56pm) <395AEDA5.442.4D63A9@localhost> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.3 08feb96 MediaMail) To: "Alan S. Harrell" , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: yahoo buys egroups... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Jun 29, 9:53am, Alan S. Harrell wrote: > On 28 Jun 2000, 22:13, Allen Smith wrote: > > > I'm concerned about this because I'm an admin for a lyris list > > (see http://www.iislists.com/scripts/lyris.pl?enter=uupoly), which > > we've been looking at moving onto egroups for various reasons > > (including the availability of a lot more other potential > > admins - people seem to have problems with the learning curve > > necessary for lyris administration, among other things). It's on a > > somewhat controversial topic, namely polyamory, so privacy is a > > concern. > > > > Anyone have any information about this? > > At eGroups you can designate your list as private and thus not have it > appear in the public database. You can hide your archives from the > public and just make available to your list members or just yourself. > You can hide other features such as your files or calendar area. Right. > As to the difficulty your list members have had with Lyris, have you > made a web site interface with list administration forms for those who > are e-mail challenged? It sort of has become obligatory for list > owners today to have a web site supporting their lists that includes > some type of subscription form. Actually, lyris includes a web site built-in; see above. The problem isn't the lack of a web interface... it's that the web interface in question is, to at least some, problematic in its design (comprehensibility). -Allen -- Allen Smith easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu