Re: Blind Address

[henryn <henryn@spacebbs.com>]

Dan:

Thanks for your response to my post:

<snip> 
>> 
>> However, while I personally have no problem with the confirmation step, but
>> it isn't the easiest to explain to a civilian.  It seems you can't just hit
>> "reply" (to the request for confirmation) and "send" right?  It seems you
>> have to cull out all the confirmation request verbiage, right?  Some people
>> will complain.
> 
> You might consider applying one of the contributed patches that make this
> step easier, or even modify /usr/local/majordomo-1.94.5/majordomo so that
> the message sent to the user for confirmation contains a URL that can be
> clicked to confirm.  Something like this near line 1630 might be handy;
> 
> #beginning of added text
> Or if your mailer allows selecting/clicking a URL, use this one to confirm:
> 
> "mailto:majordomo\@$whereami?body=auth\%20$cookie\%20$cmd\%20$list\%20$subscri
> ber"
> 
> #end of text addition
> 
> (Caveat: Test this before putting into production.  I tried the above
> on my test server, and it works well with mozilla or netscape clients.
> Your mileage may vary.)

Hmmm, all sorts of possibilities.

At this point, I _think_ that a multi-mode (web link in the email) interface
is a bit much.  If I'm going to do that, maybe I should simply go all the
way and implement something like MajorCool so all the maintenance is done
via a web interface and all the messaging (I think) continues to be done via
email. That would seem to be a very natural division.  I think some users
have conceptual trouble with mixing list posting and maintenance posting.

Does any of the contributed patches simply allow the user to hit "reply" to
confirm the subscription?

I'm also a bit leery of messing with someone else's installation.
> 
>> Is there any evidence that people post more or less to a moderated group?
>> Sure, I understand a lot depends on external factors.  All other things
>> being equal...
> 
> The only real difference between a moderated group and one that is open,
> is the responsiveness of the moderator.  A good procmail recipe on a unix
> mailbox could even automate this for you.

Could automate, but I think the best strategy is simply leave the groups
unmoderated until and unless there's a reason to make myself a weak link in
yet another case.
> 
>>> 
>>> I think you will find that enough people sign their name to email that
>>> remaining anonymous will not last long anyway.  Some sig blocks even
>>> include postal, employment, and email information.
>> 
>> I've noticed.  But I've also noticed a recent upswing in publicity about
>> spam and what seems in increase in paranoia about it.
> 
> I myself am even paranoid about spam.  Even using DNS based block lists,
> procmail recipes, spambouncer, and spamassassin at the mail server, and
> mozilla's bayesian spam filter in my email client, I am reporting several
> messages a day to spamcop.  On the other hand, using these methods, I am
> blocking nearly 300 spams a day from reaching my mailbox.  The older your
> email address is, the more susceptible your mailbox is to spam. :(

I get a couple of spams a day on my oldest email address (not this one),
with none of these measures, so I guess I can't complain.

There will be people in the community ready to roast me for exposing them in
the least. Sigh.

Thanks,

Henry

> 
> Dan Liston
> 
>