Re: List-Managers-Digest V6 #246

[Tony Sanders <sanders @ earth . com>]

"Gary E. Bickford" <garyb@fxt.com> wrote:
> this is interesting to SPAM fighters.
> 
> http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~seidl/lawsuit/

This list isn't the best place for this but... please do support
them.  I spoke with them a couple of weeks ago because I heard from
a friend that they had been having problems getting Internet Experts
to return their calls.  If you want to help, email a short note
stating the case ``Seidl v. Greentree Mortgage'' and what your area
of expertise would be to <Shirley@sostre.com> (they need DNS, Unix,
and general Internet experts).

A good place to keep track of spam cases is at:
    http://www.jmls.edu/cyber/cases/spam.html

Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com> wrote:
> So, would it be reasonable for mail list software to coerce a Bcc: of a
> list to a CC: in the header? At least then it'd be listed in the mail
> headers where a user will see it. I don't see any real negatives to it,
> but perhaps I'm missing something.

I much prefer mailing lists that have a unique header (e.g.,
Mailing-List) for use in filtering, etc.

P.A. Gantt wrote:
> BCC: is a feature of many browsers...
Huh?  `Browsers'?  Are we that far lost in the ``web age'' already? :)

Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs@hpc.uh.edu> wrote:
Subject: Re: Clueless zubscribers?
[about foo-unsub*]
> 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

That is not a given, you could easily allow the the alternate address
to be in the subject and/or the message body.