Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
There haven't been any new points raised in this thread since the first day. There's no point in replying to to this thread anymore.
Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
On Sat, 2012-05-19 at 08:25 -0400, Jerry wrote: > > Hell I bitch about a lot of things; however, that does not change the > facts of the case. Only a subset of this list received the message in > question - Likely to see how many people bitched before the rest > - and I was not one of them. Secondly, The FreeBSD forum is > constantly under siege from spammers because the operators of that > forum are to stupid/lazy/naive(place your adjective here) to require at Well, that's to "a list", where you subbed to received anything from "the list", personally I wouldn't be on any list that had no opt-in confirmation. > Now, correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Timo aware of this message > being sent? And, isn't this list controlled by Timo? Ipso facto, > doesn't that give him the right to do pretty much what he wants with > the list? > Again, to "the list", certainly NOT by targeting list members individually "off-list" and direct, especially when there is no prior granted authority to do so. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
On Sat, 19 May 2012 11:36:24 +1000 Noel Butler articulated: >non-event? You wouldnt be saying that if certain other operators with >their products did that. I've seen you bitch and whinge about far far >far less over the years Jerry. Hell I bitch about a lot of things; however, that does not change the facts of the case. Only a subset of this list received the message in question -- and I was not one of them. Secondly, The FreeBSD forum is constantly under siege from spammers because the operators of that forum are to stupid/lazy/naive(place your adjective here) to require at a minimum that posters be registered to the list. I wish I had the problems there that you are complaining about here. Now, correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Timo aware of this message being sent? And, isn't this list controlled by Timo? Ipso facto, doesn't that give him the right to do pretty much what he wants with the list? In any case, this whole thread is starting to remind me of my wife, bitching over nothing that happened months ago. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __
Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
On 2012-05-18 10:18 PM, Tamsy wrote: This thread has already evolved into an ideological conflict. Better to leave it now since every word, every further argument is just heating the atmosphere up and is scaring other users off the list… Best just to PLONK Noel, as I did a long time ago... But I totally agree, please, everyone, just let this thread die. It was a ONE TIME thing, and Timo already admitted he didn't think it through. Anyone who can't see the difference between this (non) event and what real spammers do is just brain-dead. -- Best regards, Charles
Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
On Sat, 2012-05-19 at 09:43 +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: > Almost every commercial product I know off does send unsolicited email. Indeed, its why DNSBL's were developed > There's a delete or report spam button/shortcut key for that. If it helps > some other users, and more importantly the dovecot project, i'm not too > bothered with that little inconvenience. The world doesn't revolve around > my convenience But every bit of spam would help someone depending on who that person is, maybe a tiny minute percentage, and thats why they keep doing it, but it does not justify the action to the masses. After all, spammers see it as promoting/marketing, they never call what they are doing, spamming. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
Oon-Ee Ng wrote the following on 19.05.2012 08:43: On May 19, 2012 9:36 AM, "Noel Butler" wrote: On Fri, 2012-05-18 at 06:48 -0400, Jerry wrote: basically a non-event. It must have been a really slow news day. non-event? You wouldnt be saying that if certain other operators with their products did that. I've seen you bitch and whinge about far far far less over the years Jerry. Almost every commercial product I know off does send unsolicited email. There's a delete or report spam button/shortcut key for that. If it helps some other users, and more importantly the dovecot project, i'm not too bothered with that little inconvenience. The world doesn't revolve around my convenience This thread has already evolved into an ideological conflict. Better to leave it now since every word, every further argument is just heating the atmosphere up and is scaring other users off the list…
Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
On May 19, 2012 9:36 AM, "Noel Butler" wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-05-18 at 06:48 -0400, Jerry wrote: > > > > basically a non-event. It must have been a really slow news day. > > > > non-event? You wouldnt be saying that if certain other operators with > their products did that. I've seen you bitch and whinge about far far > far less over the years Jerry. > > Almost every commercial product I know off does send unsolicited email. There's a delete or report spam button/shortcut key for that. If it helps some other users, and more importantly the dovecot project, i'm not too bothered with that little inconvenience. The world doesn't revolve around my convenience
Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
On Fri, 2012-05-18 at 06:48 -0400, Jerry wrote: > basically a non-event. It must have been a really slow news day. > non-event? You wouldnt be saying that if certain other operators with their products did that. I've seen you bitch and whinge about far far far less over the years Jerry. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
On 2012-05-18 6:48 AM, Jerry wrote: Absolutely incredible -- I have counted 35 posts in response to what is basically a non-event. It must have been a really slow news day. Yeah - I'm inclined to classify *all* of the complaints about said non-event as *spam*, since none of them were in line with the purposes of the list... ;) -- Best regards, Charles
Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
On Fri, 18 May 2012 16:01:42 +1000 Noel Butler articulated: >Doesn't matter, those acts are only effective against people from your >own country or those who use services based in that country, they do >not and can not apply to anyone else (despite what the U.S. Govt likes >to think) Absolutely incredible -- I have counted 35 posts in response to what is basically a non-event. It must have been a really slow news day. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ Dibble's First Law of Sociology: Some do, some don't.
Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
On Fri, 2012-05-18 at 11:35 +0700, Tamsy wrote: > All that noise because of one mail offering some paid support is so one mail multiplies by all the miscreants in the world adds up to a bucket load of crap > unnecessary! Actually, it has merits, because it is spam, had it gone to users@ or announce@ it of course would be no big deal, the fact it went direct is where the line was crossed when there is no explicit mention in the lists welcoming message that you might from time to time get commercial opportunity emails sent directly to you. > The Delete-Button is just one click away and in case something like this > happens too often what for do we have this wonderful Sieve to this great > Dovecot-software? ;-) As is the auto redirect address to place the senders MTA server IP in DNSBL's. Imagine the outcry you mob would be carrying on about if Microsoft did the same thing, nobody would be so quick to defend them :) OH, and it would not be the first time dovecots servers have been in a DNSBL, last time was about 2 or 3 years ago IIRC. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 20:32 -0700, Linda Walsh wrote: > Jeff Kletsky wrote: > > Even with "good intent" the message in question is clearly in > > violation of CAN-SPAM and Cal. Bus. Prof. Code Sec. 17529, of which > > the sender was informed of when my server was accessed. > --- > And you have proof of this? That they received notice? I assume > you have > their signature? Computers talking in the night doesn't count as 'proof'. > Doesn't matter, those acts are only effective against people from your own country or those who use services based in that country, they do not and can not apply to anyone else (despite what the U.S. Govt likes to think) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
Linda Walsh wrote the following on 18.05.2012 10:32: Jeff Kletsky wrote: Even with "good intent" the message in question is clearly in violation of CAN-SPAM and Cal. Bus. Prof. Code Sec. 17529, of which the sender was informed of when my server was accessed. --- And you have proof of this? That they received notice? I assume you have their signature? Computers talking in the night doesn't count as 'proof'. It was very clearly an "electronic mail message the primary purpose of which is the commercial advertisement or promotion of a commercial product or service." === Really? Dovecot is a commercial venture? I thought it was free software. Someone, with the personal permission of the list owner was allowed to mention that they would be willing to offer support for this product? Are you pissed because they didn't offer it for free? This is a list about dovecot -- no where does it say it will be private nor that the email addresses on this list are protected from spam. Dovecot isn't a private company. It doesn't matter if it was good or bad intent. You being on this list of your own free will establishes a relationship of the sort that, if pre-existing, permits commercial offers. If you don't want that ever again, otherwise by remaining on the list, you give some permission for occasional messages that might be construed to offering services for money, that are approved by the list owner. If it exceeds anyone's tolerance, including mine, I would believe any of us would have the same right to leave. I don't think the list owner would want to abuse his position and cause wholesale departures. OTOH, I don't think this rises anywhere near to the level of even the most minor offense. Personally, I found this discussion *about* the issue to have generated more traffic than all the spam I've gotten from this list in the past 6 months. So -- guess what? I don't care. You might want to reconsider your demands on the list owner who has put together some fine quality software for your use -- for free. Otherwise, you risk really looking like a completely self-centered pompous ass. And note, this is based on current traffic levels from this list of such email (which are way exceeded by the people talking about it -- so it's completely irrational to argue about it occurring or not when the people complaining about it have generated over 10 times as much traffic in a few days. As for the spam levels from here.. My spam filters regularly take out about 30 spam messages/day (based on the 1200+ messages in the past 40 days in my spam folder). Like 1 email from a list I subscribe to is gonna likely even be noticed by me?? Unlikely. (normally a lurker, but someone who can't tolerate intolerance! ;-) )... Well said Linda! All that noise because of one mail offering some paid support is so unnecessary! The Delete-Button is just one click away and in case something like this happens too often what for do we have this wonderful Sieve to this great Dovecot-software? ;-)
Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: you might be supporting the lists owner!!
Jeff Kletsky wrote: Even with "good intent" the message in question is clearly in violation of CAN-SPAM and Cal. Bus. Prof. Code Sec. 17529, of which the sender was informed of when my server was accessed. --- And you have proof of this? That they received notice? I assume you have their signature? Computers talking in the night doesn't count as 'proof'. It was very clearly an "electronic mail message the primary purpose of which is the commercial advertisement or promotion of a commercial product or service." === Really? Dovecot is a commercial venture? I thought it was free software. Someone, with the personal permission of the list owner was allowed to mention that they would be willing to offer support for this product? Are you pissed because they didn't offer it for free? This is a list about dovecot -- no where does it say it will be private nor that the email addresses on this list are protected from spam. Dovecot isn't a private company. It doesn't matter if it was good or bad intent. You being on this list of your own free will establishes a relationship of the sort that, if pre-existing, permits commercial offers. If you don't want that ever again, otherwise by remaining on the list, you give some permission for occasional messages that might be construed to offering services for money, that are approved by the list owner. If it exceeds anyone's tolerance, including mine, I would believe any of us would have the same right to leave. I don't think the list owner would want to abuse his position and cause wholesale departures. OTOH, I don't think this rises anywhere near to the level of even the most minor offense. Personally, I found this discussion *about* the issue to have generated more traffic than all the spam I've gotten from this list in the past 6 months. So -- guess what? I don't care. You might want to reconsider your demands on the list owner who has put together some fine quality software for your use -- for free. Otherwise, you risk really looking like a completely self-centered pompous ass. And note, this is based on current traffic levels from this list of such email (which are way exceeded by the people talking about it -- so it's completely irrational to argue about it occurring or not when the people complaining about it have generated over 10 times as much traffic in a few days. As for the spam levels from here.. My spam filters regularly take out about 30 spam messages/day (based on the 1200+ messages in the past 40 days in my spam folder). Like 1 email from a list I subscribe to is gonna likely even be noticed by me?? Unlikely. (normally a lurker, but someone who can't tolerate intolerance! ;-) )...
