Various people wrote: > 1. Do many people use the "X-No-Archive: Yes" Header to prevent their > postings appearing on google groups. Is this bad practice to use by > default in emails etc?
The idea of public mailing lists is that information is archived for future use; if you want to disable that, you may as well send a private reply in the first place. In any case, use of "X-No-Archive: Yes" is almost certainly a waste of time as it is a suggestion, not an enforcement. > While some folks do address mangling in their signatures, I don't know of > anyone who actually subscribes to a mailing list with a fake sig and > manages to get the postings :-) You subscribe with a real address, but only the list manager knows that. After that, you post with an invalid From:. This protects pretty much 100% from spam. For personal replies, you write some prose which only a human can use to derive your functional reply address. Unfortunately most mailing list managers are a PITA and don't allow this, including majordomo and mailman. ezmlm is absolutely fine (perhaps DJB is right afterall). mutt-users works, whatever it runs on. Personally I don't give a stuff whether RFC requires a valid From: unless RFC tells me how to protect from spam. Mailing list managers which don't offer spam protection are clearly deficient, this appears to include all but ezmlm. Most don't offer post-only subscription either. Changing addresses once a month or so is simply not practical (sum up how long it takes to unsubscribe/resubscribe with all that password business for 50 mailing lists). Spam filtering leaves a few things to be desired (and I have some issues with spamassassin). If you have an unlimited supply of email addresses you could use a different address for each list and junk any incoming mail not from the respective list server, but the average person does not have that. I don't see how using reply-to: is any use, any spammer with half a brain would harvest both from: and reply-to:. > > 2. Do many people use a fake email address from? Ie, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > This is really bad since it will generate bouncing mails > that other people have to take of. Not nearly as much as is saved by the reduction in spam, so there's a net gain to the internet. > Better use a dummy > account you don't read (just delete the mail). And how does that count on traffic? Much worse, it creates traffic to *my* ISP, rather than to the ISP of the spammer (who I don't care about). > the main thing > to note is it's really rude to use a domain name that may actually > exist. ...unless it's [EMAIL PROTECTED] :) oops. > there's also an address (i forget what it is) that you can use that's > been provided just for people to use when they don't want to put a valid > address somewhere - it sends an autoresponse back explaining that. Great, looks ideal. How do I get subscribed to e.g. majordomo lists though with that? Hm, use reply-to: for the subscription? I thought I tried that. Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann is possibly list0570 with the domain in header http://volker.orcon.net.nz/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
