On Thu, 11 Jun 1998, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
) In message <v03110706b1a53618090f@[206.28.74.88]>,
) Ken Hooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
) >Dunno whether this is true but I'm sure you'll never get any but a minority
) >of list owners to implement it without coercing them somehow...
) I prefer to call it gentle persuasion.
)
) Either sign up or else your mailing list traffic will be rejected by my
) site as being probable spam.
I haven't really been following this thread, so I may be putting my foot
in my mouth, but...
) Of course, if we are talking about the monkeys.com domain (total of 1 user)
) nobody gives a damn. However if AOL decided to do this, or Hotmail, then
) I think that you would find a lot of list admins getting with the program.
I think that's disgusting. That's almost sorta kinda like "if you want to
sell one computer with Windows, you have to sell them all with Windows,"
except in this case it's not so "bad."
) >... and that would be wrong.
) OK. I'll bite. Why?
)
) Are mailing list administrators like minor dieties or something?
Taken in context, absolutely!
I run over 60 mailing lists on narnia, and I'll be damned before I let
some half-twit (either at monkeys.com or aol.com) tell me I have to have
my mailing lists added to some list before their users will be able to
participate.
The correct answer to "I can't subscribe to your mailing list because my
ISP has some blocking thing setup" is "get a decent ISP."
) Is there
) something wrong with asking them to do their part to help end sbulk E-mail
) spam on the Internet??
I find that emailing the full message and full headers to
abuse@THEIRDIRECTUPSTREAMPROVIDER usually works absolutely wonderfully.
Even AGIS responds to my messages [sometimes].
--
Daniel Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
It is better to be defeated on principle than to win on lies. -- Arthur Calwell
