Double Irony! (was Re: [linux-elitists] ruben's stupid filter)
Sun Mar 24 15:02:43 PST 2002
>>>>> "DW" == Dan Wilder <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
DW> This catches, for example, hotmail, which refuses bounces, but
DW> which also acts as mail host for a bunch of our paying
DW> clients. [...]
Whoa! I didn't know this. If I am reading this correctly people who
use hotmail accaunts will have no idea if what they thought they sent
had problems in transit. Is this really so? Do hotmail users
understand the downside of this?
I'd personally be pissed if somebody reported me to any of my
upstreams using an overzealous script. Why do people think that
automating such things as reporting abuse is a good idea? I have
addresses that are still valid and more than 10+ years old that I
used on usenet, and the amount of spam I get is not unmanageable.
So I have trouble understanding why people risk wasting their
legitimate correspondents' time by automating abuse reporting.
I am annoyed at people who mail me back saying stuff like "oh sorry I
missed your e-mail because my outlook filter put it in the wrong
folder." I don't know why I should tolerate additional false
reporting from people who runs some *nix variant.
More information about the linux-elitists