From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 23 21:37:54 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 DFB5416A417 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 21:37:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd01@dgmm.net) Received: from lon-mail-1.gradwell.net (lon-mail-1.gradwell.net [193.111.201.125]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AFA113C483 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 21:37:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd01@dgmm.net) Received: from lon-mail-1.gradwell.net ([193.111.201.125] helo=webmaker country=GB ident=dave&pop3*dgmm$net) by lon-mail-1.gradwell.net with esmtpa (Gradwell gwh-smtpd 1.250) id 46cdfe30.17257.8 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:37:52 +0100 (envelope-sender ) From: dgmm To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:37:53 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 References: <20070823131957.GA35322@owl.midgard.homeip.net> <200708232006.47499.freebsd01@dgmm.net> <48424AE4482EFBB0113C8C96@utd59514.utdallas.edu> In-Reply-To: <48424AE4482EFBB0113C8C96@utd59514.utdallas.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200708232237.53712.freebsd01@dgmm.net> 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 21:37:55 -0000 On Thursday 23 August 2007, 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 a= nd > >> 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 mu= ch > >> documentation exists directing people to ask their questions here. > > > > This does, in fact, open up a distinct possibility for list subscribers > > who =A0want to stop their address being harvested. > > > > Subscribe to the list with one email address such that one receives the > > list =A0emails but post to the list with =A0a 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. How does this equate to double the work for the list maintainers? I've nev= er=20 operated a mailing list so I don't understand what work is involved in=20 operating one or how that workload might be increased if some people post=20 with one name while having the automated system mail out to a different,=20 subscribed address > Seems rather self-centered to me. In what way? > This is the internet. =A0Spam is endemic. So rather than look for multiple methods to reduce the amount of incoming t= o=20 *my* address I should just accept it all and filter it locally? That seems rather irresponsible to me, ANy method which can help stop it=20 source appeaers on the face of it to be a better solution. > Short of encasing your computer in=20 > concrete, there's no way to avoid getting spam **even if you never post to > a mailing list**. =A0Either learn to deal with it or stop subscribing to > lists. I'm sure that attitude will appear welcoming to new users. =2D-=20 Dave