Hi,

On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 09:33:03PM -0500, Brad Knowles wrote:
> On May 18, 2012, at 5:14 PM, Anne Wainwright wrote:
> 
> > For the record the following URL is of interest
> > 
> > http://www.spamhaus.org/consumer/definition/
> > 
> > This clearly makes the point that spam is defined by two factors
> > 
> > "A message is Spam only if it is both Unsolicited and Bulk"
> > 
> > and being who they are their definition must carry some weight. In terms
> > of their definition my mailing was not spam. Still, and I think Stephen
> > made the point, there is also the consideration of good business
> > practice to be considered.
> 
> Actually, if you go back to Mark's message where he said:
> 
>       As an additional FYI in this thread, Mailman sends invitations
>       with a "Precedence: bulk" header. This can only be changed by
>       modifying code.
Thanks for clarifying that, Brad, I wasn't sure what the import of
Mark's messsage was.

Why would this not be set to 'list' rather than 'bulk'?

Just interested

bestest
Anne

> 
> Then you will note that the message you sent does actually qualify on both 
> counts -- it was most definitely unsolicited (by your own account), and 
> unless you modified the source code then Mailman definitely marked those 
> invitations as "bulk".
> 
> Even if Mailman hadn't marked the messages as bulk per se, if you sent out 
> invitations to more than one person, then that could also be classified as 
> essentially being "bulk".
> 
> 
> There are features in Mailman that can be misused and abused in a wide 
> variety of ways, and it is the responsibility of the Site Administrator(s) 
> and the List Administrator(s) to make sure that they operate the software in 
> an appropriate manner.
> 
> For example, if you were using Mailman internally to your company and could 
> guarantee that no one could ever get on any list unless they were an 
> employee, then by the terms of the employment contract you might be able to 
> do things that might otherwise be considered of a "spammy nature", like 
> requiring that all employees be subscribed to certain lists that they can't 
> unsubscribe from, sending out invitations to join mailing lists that they did 
> not request, etc….
> 
> We have to allow for these kinds of things because not everyone uses Mailman 
> in the same way for the same user community.  And some types of actions are 
> appropriate for certain user communities but not for others.  We can't just 
> disable or remove features simply because they are not appropriate for a 
> particular user community.
> 
> In essence, you're asking us to protect you against yourself, and there is a 
> limit to how much of that we can do.  At least, there is a limit to how much 
> we can do if we want to keep the software usable for other people.
> 
> --
> Brad Knowles <b...@shub-internet.org>
> LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>
> 
------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Reply via email to