(figures, apparently my mail program is one of those *broken* ones so
apologies, this originally sent off list)
Hello Cyndi,
I do see where you are coming from, but abuse issues can go the opposite
direction from your description, and usually does.
The host I work for does NOT turn off mass subscription capability (but
also only provides the web interface). With that said, our abuse policy
states that all users must be double-opt in. Whether this is done via
Mailman or they're own script and database is up to the user, but they
had better be able to provide proof that the subscriber was double-opt in.
The reason for this is simple. Most hosts providing Mailman (or similar
package) do so on shared servers (our servers have up to 2000 lists per
server). If *for any reason what-so-ever* a user's list causes an ISP to
take notice, the ISP will most likely take notice by blocking that
shared server affecting all 1999 other lists on that server. Most ISP's
will then specifically request proof that the message was requested and
not unsolicited, and the best (and yes, legal way) to prove that is if
you have proof that the user was opted into the list TWICE.
In our eyes, the problem has nothing to do with some spammer mass
subscribing users (we have NEVER had this problem, actually... unless
the admin gets they're password compromised). It has everything to do
with covering our customers butts. :-)
Just offering the other side of the issue.
Krystal
Cyndi Norwitz wrote:
Please let me know if I should post this elsewhere too.
The Mass Subscribe feature has two settings: on and off. Although Mailman
was designed for users to self-install, and presumably they can trust
themselves not to abuse it, the truth is that an awful lot of Mailman list
owners do not have access to the full software, just the web interface.
My use of Mailman is through my ISP, but there are other users who use
software installed by a business group, university, or other entity. My
ISP has chosen to turn off Mass Subscribe. Only the invite feature is
left.
I completely understand why they have done this and I have to concur. They
have thousands of users and hundreds of mailing lists. The potential for
abuse is great. They did a mass subscribe for me when I transfered my
lists from another provider, but they're not going to do one or two
subscribers here, three or four there, and so on.
It's a huge pain in the neck for users not to be able to add subscribers
directly. For my larger lists, I prefer subscribers to do it themselves,
but I have the occasional person who just can't manage it. But I also run
smaller lists, including several for a nonprofit, and it's just
embararssing that I can't add the board members and others who ask me to.
My request is for an intermediate step that the provider can set.
Something like subscribing one name at a time (so it's too much of a pain
for a spammer to put in a thousand names) or up to 10 a day, or something
that will make a large provider feel more comfortable but not completely
remove the feature from the users.
Thanks,
Cyndi
@ sonic.net
------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/zipfel%40greenacrestechnology.com
Security Policy:
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp
------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Security Policy:
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp
