From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 20 14:28:22 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F3EB16A4CE for ; Sat, 20 Dec 2003 14:28:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [63.229.157.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D5F043D45 for ; Sat, 20 Dec 2003 14:28:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from runaround.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp1000.lariat.org@lariat.org [63.229.157.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA17078; Sat, 20 Dec 2003 15:27:35 -0700 (MST) X-message-flag: Warning! Use of Microsoft Outlook renders your system susceptible to Internet worms. Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20031006075024.04ec1ea0@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.0.22 To: Diane Bruce , Bill Moran From: Brett Glass In-Reply-To: <20031219205028.GA68966@heceta.db.net> References: <3FE34F3F.1050908@401.cx> <3FE35045.3020201@potentialtech.com> <20031219205028.GA68966@heceta.db.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Thank you for opting-in X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 22:28:22 -0000 X-Original-Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 07:53:48 -0600 X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 22:28:22 -0000 At 02:50 PM 12/19/2003, Diane Bruce wrote: >It still amazes me that there are still sites around that opt in >without email confirmation from the "victim." Thousands. Paul Vixie's MAPS has a whole DNS blacklist devoted to them. They call them "NMLs" -- nonconforming (or, as some people expand the acronym, nonconfirming) mailing lists. I used to write for a magazine which had online newsletters and refused to do confirmation. Their marketroids had decreed that this not be done because "it might reduce the number of subscribers." Their advertising rates went by the number of subscribers, so they refused to consider the notion that an unwilling subscriber was worse than one less. --Brett Glass