On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
> It's true. It's not all that new, BYU's done that forever.
Thank goodness, then, that I have no BYU subscribers.
> he's considers it abuse for what reason?
Because he (or his mail server, which is also my mail server) received
2,000 messages that had long ago been delivered to NetZero users.
Earlier this month, as a list owner, I also received such a mailstorm from
a deadbeat subscriber and told people on this list about the 382 messages
I'd received in the space of two minutes from NetZero.
> I find it irritating, but who says how long is too long to hold mail
> for delivery? three days? A week? a month? six?
Robert Dinse and I are not complaining about how long to hold mail. We
are complaining about how to handle "stale e-mail", no matter what they
mean by that.
> bounces are bounces... (shrug)
Maybe "bounce" isn't the right name for this. Take a look at this quote
from a NetZero "stale mail" notice:
---begin quote---
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:46:12 PDT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: stale mail
Content-Length: 3307
Your mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with subject: Re: Studio Ghibli DVD/VCD info
sent on: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 08:05:00 -0600 is being returned to you.
It sat unread in the mailbox beyond NetZero's 6 month limit.
---end quote---
What would you call this? I don't care if this is called a bounce or not,
but I certainly don't want to receive 382 of these (1.4MB) again one day.
I've already drafted a letter to send to my remaining 3 NetZero
subscribers to ask them to change their subscription addresses.
Anyway, I'm curious. What do you consider valid reasons to bounce e-mail?
I thought (but I don't pretend to be correct), that bounces occur when
errors are encountered during delivery or receipt. If I understand
NetZero's error messages correctly, they successfully delivered mail to a
user who decided not to read it.
I don't expect to receive any error messages regarding successfully
delivered e-mail. I don't remember receiving such in the 9 years that
I've been online. I hope that ISPs don't believe it necessary to go
puking unread messages back at the sender (which could be me or my mailing
list) for the sole reason that the message was successfully delivered but
not read for a period of time. That's what mailbox full errors and disk
quotas are for, don't you think?
--
Michael S. Johnson Miyazaki Web and Mailing List Owner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.nausicaa.net/miyazaki/mailing-list
