Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 08:57:23 +0200 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: jungleboogie0 <jungleboogie0@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Spam to list participants (from openhosting.com & softcom.com) Message-ID: <20140501085723.b3b9a6f3.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <CAKE2PDtVGayT9LEW7iLkvzCHnPSx=R5f42sRq7bFBN=CtzpsMw@mail.gmail.com> References: <73354.1398734218@server1.tristatelogic.com> <535F1667.1050406@soliddataservices.com> <20140429114019.0eb3ce48@X220.alogt.com> <20140429124618.06d708ba@gumby.homeunix.com> <20140429204204.2e561935@X220.alogt.com> <20140429140123.GA910@taco-shack.cow> <20140429162810.76013a19@gumby.homeunix.com> <20140430101545.GA931@taco-shack.cow> <20140430211232.1a1f06dc99b4b799b1dabfc5@sohara.org> <CAKE2PDtVGayT9LEW7iLkvzCHnPSx=R5f42sRq7bFBN=CtzpsMw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:34:14 -0700, jungleboogie0 wrote:
> Hi Steve,
> On 30 April 2014 13:12, Steve O'Hara-Smith <steve@sohara.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 05:15:46 -0500
> > Mike Sanders <tmp1@freebsd.hypermart.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Which implies all list members email addresses are exposed
> >> to the world at large? How else would an email address be
> >> gained by spammers... If that's the case it needs to be changed.
> >
> > I think it's only hitting posters, whose addresses are revealed in
> > the From header. I'll probably get some extra spam now. Given that it is
> > desirable that non subscribers can post questions and get replys thanks to
> > the common habit of replying to all this is unavoidable without sacrificing
> > that capability which has been a long standing and valued feature of
> > FreeBSD mailing lists.
> >
>
> But this also means messages to the list could be lost because not
> everyone remember to reply-all.
Some participants do not _like_ to "addressed twice" (first via
the mailing list, the regular reply, then CC'ed), others do
explicitely ask for it ("please cc me, I'm not subscribed").
When the sender's address is omitted (when a list member receives
a post), this flexibility is lost. Additionally, addresses could
have been harvested from a post itself: Most MUAs write a short
reply header in which they state the name and address of the sender
(and usually the date signature) of the message they reply to.
If Mailman removes the addresses, but keeps the name, this
functionality could be kept. (Additionally, some MUAs already
so something like that: keeping the name and date, removing
the address, as mine does due to a request). But on the other
hand, writing off-list to someone would then be impossible...
FreeBSD's list policy always has been "be open". It's possible
to apply functional limitations to a mailing list, but the
question is: Does the amount of spam justify it for _this_
mailing list? I know, it's much easier to deal with this kind
of problems in a web forum, but a mailing list _is not a_ web
forum.
Allow me to add my very individual opinion: The amount of spam
which _I_ currently receive is so low that "dealing with it"
has the following form on my side: hitting the DEL key from
time to time. It isn't _that_ great, but it's still acceptable.
If the amount of "DEL pressing" would raise, I'd probably define
some (MUA-based) filter rules for client-side deletion. And if
the amount increases, I'd probably move that functionality over
to the mail server so I don't even receive the messages. But
the current amount, as I said, is too low (for me!) to even
think about it. :-)
--
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140501085723.b3b9a6f3.freebsd>