Re: [DNG] To cc or not cc. (was: Devuan with usr merge?)
Steve Litt wrote: > The biggest accomplishment of this DMARC/DKIM thing was to make email > such a mess that it sent even more of the dummy dwobes to Facebook, a > private club having a monopoly over communication. What could POSSIBLY > go wrong? I don’t think it has. From past experience, it’s taught many people that “the only email you should use is gmail (or one of a handful of others)” because of the things they broke (deliberately). At my last job, we ran a mail server for our clients. When I started there it was (IIRC) iMail ruling on Win NT and it got hacked regularly. I got asked if I could knock something up - which I did, a “temporary” setup with linux, Postfix, Postfixadmin, Amavis, and a few more bits. It was temporary for quite a long time, and needless to say, quite reliable in spite of me only having “hand me down” hardware to run my servers on - I was putting hardware into service that was (as my manager described it) 9 year past it’s swap out date ! But I digress. After a good few years, I did a refresh and built a clustered system with before-acceptance mail scanning - something the big guys don’t seem to be able to manage. As a policy, we’d setup clients with their own email to match their websites - so (e.g.) bloggscoffeeshop.co.uk would have (e.g.) i...@bloggscoffeeshop.co.uk for email. I’ve always thought it looks just plain naff when you see a custom website with a nice domain name - and a generic email like (e.g.) blogg...@btinternet.com. But, many clients just refused to have two email accounts on their computer even though we’d offer to set it up for them. So many were simple redirects so that mail to i...@bloggscoffeeshop.co.uk just got redirected to blogg...@btinternet.com. Which worked fine until Google, MS, and Yahoo between them broke it and we had to explain to our clients that Google, MS, Yahoo, et al had broken their email setup deliberately. But still, many refused to simply setup their nice email address as a second account in their client - I’ve noticed that even MS have relented and the built-in client in Win 10 now allows this, the built-in piece of rubbish in Win 8 didn’t. So many simply changed the address on their website to be their ISP provided email. And as far as the clients were concerned, the problem was our broken mail service - hence they need to use a “proper” one. I did look into applying SRS, but with the combination of tools I was using, that broke one of our key anti-spam measures. So as far as I’m concerned, the fact that they broke stuff was quite deliberate. The likes of Google, MS, Yahoo, etc would far rather people use their systems (so they can monetise their emails) than have it easy for smaller outfits to run fully functional emails systems. And between them they had/have enough of the market to simply declare something broken, change it, and force the rest of the world to change to suit them. Simon ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] To cc or not cc. (was: Devuan with usr merge?)
Ludovic Bellière via Dng said on Sat, 6 Nov 2021 03:00:38 +0100 >On Fri, 05 Nov 2021, Steve Litt wrote: > >> >>Me too. I'm on the list, and people cc'ing me when replying to the >>list or writing to me and cc'ing the list just complexify my life. >> > >One thing to keep in mind is that not everybody contributing to the >exchange is, in fact, subscribed to the list. It takes a special type of hubris bordering on narcissism to email a mailing list, to which one didn't bother to subscribe, and expect people to jump through extra hoops to get back to one. The old "please cc me because I'm not on the list" thing is presumptuous. And, as a good citizen who subscribes to every mailing list he writes to, it frosts my petunias to have to deal with pairs of email to accommodate such self-centered drive-by emailers. > Not >only that, but one might want to cc the list as an archival purpose. This is easily accomplished by sending the sole reply to the list. And if I'm not on that list, it's considered a privacy breach and seriously bad form to reply what I sent personally to the list. >Or even send the message to multiple lists along relevant recipients >which may not be subscribed… First, cross posting to several lists is considered rude, it's despised by many sysadmins, and it's really bad form. Add to such cross posting that one isn't even a normal community member, and such a post borders on spam. >People interracting around here aren't prescient and do not >necessarily know if you are, or not, subscribed. Announcement: Steve Litt is subscribe, reads every DNG email, and neither needs nor wants second copies :-) You know, a more serious cause of this problem is this DKIM/DMARC thing that cause mailing list admins to jump through hoops, including bolting on a personal cc where one didn't exist before. I personally try hard to remember to erase the cc inserted by DNG before clicking Send. What would be even better would be if all mailing lists defaulted to replying just to the list, yet still being able to somehow convey the email address of the sender just in case there's a reason to email that sender privately. The biggest accomplishment of this DMARC/DKIM thing was to make email such a mess that it sent even more of the dummy dwobes to Facebook, a private club having a monopoly over communication. What could POSSIBLY go wrong? SteveT Steve Litt Spring 2021 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques of the Successful Technologist http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
[DNG] To cc or not cc. (was: Devuan with usr merge?)
On Fri, 05 Nov 2021, Steve Litt wrote: Me too. I'm on the list, and people cc'ing me when replying to the list or writing to me and cc'ing the list just complexify my life. One thing to keep in mind is that not everybody contributing to the exchange is, in fact, subscribed to the list. As such, replying to the group would then include everybody relevant to the discussion. Not only that, but one might want to cc the list as an archival purpose. Or even send the message to multiple lists along relevant recipients which may not be subscribed… People interracting around here aren't prescient and do not necessarily know if you are, or not, subscribed. Cheers, Ludovic signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
