>>>>> "CM" == Claire McNab <claire@siberia.demon.co.uk> writes:
CM> The thing about the foo-unzub mechanism, is that:
CM> a) it's the most easily understood and easily used of the mechanisms
CM> I've seen to date;
But it doesn't have a mechanism to specify the address to remove... So in
the instructions, we have to describe one method, then switch gears
massively and describe a completely different method. The end result would
seem to be more confusion. A separate address for zubscription would seem
to have the additional problem of trying to zubscribe spammers to your list
when they misdirect mail to it.
CM> b) It's part of a proposed standard.
Which one? We already have the proposed list-header standard, which makes
this irrelevant. Hopefully we won't get several overlapping standards;
it's hard enough keeping up with several moving targets. We don't need any
more, especially if they conflict.
Not that I think this is a bad idea, just that it needs to be thought out
just a bit more.
- J<
References:
|
|
