From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 23 20:15:55 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B291F16A418 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 20:15:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from illoai@gmail.com) Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com (fk-out-0910.google.com [209.85.128.189]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4989F13C4E5 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 20:15:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from illoai@gmail.com) Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id b27so611794fka for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:15:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=neR/l/TDCkbRsPabrxWdYLcHgGdvtQtkFmDINfsmtIuLzVO4EXRmyINctVVT/XebpYax+YqmpxZW+X0pTohHR7pWKH4FAgQnUlHQ9ur/BduhryHPccsD+pVdhpbKemVn2hYPyavBNzb4cVNz39ZornVk1LFSmu+uLmyI3WSjKIs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=PeGt9lTepZlSHva13k7rjWAKEqUR47pBVUzOSjddmCzvLtDlLNXSDw7t1oenx3LUeBh4UzrPILkhYWCxouVFbebErHBklKAbc6zj5x1wGNTIBEZuoSoCIkKsZKKO+wYTtFAOwadAAK6592yfCss9htHlkefzXg/A0qHV67wCGH4= Received: by 10.82.174.20 with SMTP id w20mr4858598bue.1187900144931; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:15:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.82.185.5 with HTTP; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:15:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 15:15:44 -0500 From: "illoai@gmail.com" To: "Paul Schmehl" In-Reply-To: <48424AE4482EFBB0113C8C96@utd59514.utdallas.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070823131957.GA35322@owl.midgard.homeip.net> <20070823135221.GA35537@owl.midgard.homeip.net> <200708232006.47499.freebsd01@dgmm.net> <48424AE4482EFBB0113C8C96@utd59514.utdallas.edu> Cc: "freebsd-questions@FreeBSD. ORG" Subject: Re: spammers harvesting emaill address from this list X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 20:15:55 -0000 On 23/08/07, Paul Schmehl wrote: > --On Thursday, August 23, 2007 20:06:47 +0100 dgmm > wrote: > > > On Thursday 23 August 2007, Erik Trulsson wrote: > >> For this list (freebsd-questions@) in particular it is intentionally and > >> explicitly the case that one does not need to be subscribed to post here. > >> This is because it is the main support forum for FreeBSD, and much > >> documentation exists directing people to ask their questions here. > > > > This does, in fact, open up a distinct possibility for list subscribers > > who want to stop their address being harvested. > > > > Subscribe to the list with one email address such that one receives the > > list emails but post to the list with a different address. > > Basically, what you (and others as well) are suggesting is that the list > maintainers do double the work so that you don't have to bother with spam > filtering. > > Seems rather self-centered to me. > > This is the internet. Spam is endemic. Short of encasing your computer in > concrete, there's no way to avoid getting spam **even if you never post to > a mailing list**. Either learn to deal with it or stop subscribing to > lists. Just to toss in a couple of coppers: It is quite sad to see the general openness and respect of the internet bludgeoned into submission to some need for relief from these hideous human beings. Of course, it is the same reason you have to have unlisted phone numbers, do-not-call lists, bomb searches: humans. On the other side, the days of responsilbe admins and ISPs literally pulling the plug on irresponsible users seems long past as well. I suppose I am arguing for these lists continuing the way they are, and just dealing with the fact that spam outruns legitimate mails 3:1. -- --