Michelle Konzack <linux4miche...@tamay-dogan.net> writes:

> Hello Chris,
>
> Am 2010-03-18 14:26:31, schrieb Chris Richman:
>> Hi, Michael.  If there is an email address that you'd like to never
>> receive email from LinkedIn, let me know and I can add it to our
>> suppression list.
>> 
>> Sorry for the troubles.
>
> Is this a Joke?
>
> Should forward you all arround 3200 Linkedin Invites and remindesr?
>
> I suggest to blocklist following domains:
>
>   @postgesql.org            -> Mailinglist server
>   @gnome.org                -> Mailinglist server but unfortunately
>                                some private EMails too
>   @lists.denx.de            -> Mailinglist server (e.g. "u-boot")
>   @lists.freeradius.org     -> Mailinglist server
>   @lists.sourceforge.net    -> Mailinglist server (e.g. alleg-main)
>   @lists.fedoraproject.org  -> Mailinglist server 
>
>   @bugs.debian.org          -> Debian Bug Tracking System
>
> if you mailbox support it, I have a script  to  forward  all  "LinkedIn"
> spams to your Mailbox.

I refrained from commenting at first, mostly because I get far more
facebook spam than linkedin spam.

There seem to be two problems.  One is that linkedin/facebook/etc. users
manually type email addresses or click on 'add foo to your network', and
some of this is spam (when the people are totally unknown).  This seem
intrinsic to the system.

The other issue is bulk uploading of address books, and a feature to
send invitation spam to everyone on the address book.  In my view
Offering bulk uploading/sending is a choice that any reasonable person
would expect to lead to spam, and responsible services shouldn't do
that.  But in all my mails to abuse@, I've never gotten a straight
answer.  Are you willing to actually solve the bulk invitation spam by
removing the mechanism?  If not, are you willing to tag bulk-generated
messages so they can be scored.

ObOnTopic: I realize it's moving beyond the usual SA rules, but perhaps
rules that assign scores based on failure to follow reasonable policies
are in order.  Giving 3 points to invitations that could be
bulk-generated seems reaononable.



Attachment: pgpRhnQiJfzX4.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to