Re: [OT] Spam fights
Incoming from no name supplied:
> First off, if you are not Richard Atterer (email@example.com)
> and you are strapped for time, I'd like to warn you in advance that
> On Jun 10, 2004, at 6:10 AM, Richard Atterer wrote:
> >On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 12:27:04PM +0300, Dmitry Golubev wrote:
> >>I second that. If I receive a confirmation message I never respond to
> >If *I* receive a confirmation message, I always respond to it!
> >That's because all confirmation messages I get are in response to spam
> >my address in the From field. If I confirm, the person sending me the
> >confirmation message will be delivered the spam. If more people did
> >confirmation senders would notice that the system doesn't work.
> Well, you're just an asshole. It has been said that without assholes
Now, now. This list does have rules.
Anyone using a C-R system is just _asking_ for it to be abused.
That's the "Challenge" in C-R. If anyone challenges me, I followup,
and they're ridiculously naive not to expect it.
I'm not Richard. I don't reply to Spam, worms, viruses, or C-R
systems (except for self-initiated requests, of course). However, I
can see where he's coming from. I don't fault him a bit.
> subjected to such a process. Which brings me to what really annoys
> "Out of Office" messages posted to mailing lists. Bob, if I cared that
Pot ... Kettle ... Black. You're allowed your hot buttons, but he's not?
> translation to your OO message, or, better still, stop sending it to
> the list.
Better yet, stop telling the burglars you're on vacation. Why would
anyone want to do that?!?
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.