On 09/10/2008 16:04, mike scott wrote:
On 9 Oct 2008 at 8:54, Barbara Duprey wrote:
...
I'd think the message was pretty hard to misinterpret legally -- the
original request asked to unsubscribe "me" and is included in the
message that unsubscribes "me" (because it's a reply, not an independent
message). But here's an alternative that, while less responsive to the
request, would avoid the issue.
If such a request comes in from a subscribed user (say,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]), we can send a message like:
*From this account ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The subject and content are ignored,
only the address matters.) You should soon get an unsubscribe
confirmation message. Once you respond to that, your subscription will
be canceled. If you do not receive such a message within a day or so,
you can try contacting [EMAIL PROTECTED] to get a person with
authority to unsubscribe you. There is nothing more that the users on
this list can do to help. Goodbye, and we'll hope to hear from you again
some day.*
How about the unsubscribed user case -- did you see any problem there?
I don't understand - if there's no subscription at all, the issue
does not arise.
If there's /any/ actual subscription, anyone else attempting to help
undo that could as I see it have potential problems. And especially
with scenarios like Chuck, where yet another party is involved (we
had only Chuck's word that there was ever any problem with a
forwarding address; not that I disbelieve him, but you can picture a
possible scenario.)
Mike Scott: if you are right that the attacker is committing an illegal
act by forwarding [spam] mail to the victim, wouldn't the victim be
justified in taking appropriate action by attempting to unsubscribe that
attacker? The victim can only unsubscribe the attacker by virtue of the
[illegal] forwarding.
--
Harold Fuchs
London, England
Please reply *only* to users@openoffice.org
