On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Michael Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Indeed, and if you review my previous mail I believe you will find >>> that's exactly what I said. >>> >>> The problem isn't that Yahoo is doing anything wrong. The problem >>> is that leaving signatures on list mail leads to bogus results. >> >> And complaints you can't really take action on. It's not your mailing >> list, so you cannot prevent further mail to the recipient. > > Sure you can. If one of your users is spamming, this would be interesting > too. The problem here is that John apparently doesn't like the service that > Y! provides, and instead of taking that up with Y! he's decided to blame it > on DKIM. If you subscribe to a mailing list and post to it, that's a far cry from a bulk distribution of unwanted mail. I'm not sure that any sort of report like that would ever establish that a user is spamming. If the user is posting objectionable content to a list, the immediate resolution is for the list manager to remove that subscriber. So, we're back to, it should go to the list manager, not the originating ISP. I would find it useless for it to go back to the original person's ISP by way of an FBL because I would not be able to find it actionable. Why? Because there was distribution of the email in question outside of the control of the original sender. I guess that's what it boils down to for me. If a message is being re-distributed outside of my control, ala how discussion lists work, I don't think I am any longer the responsible party as far as a spam report goes. I'm not grok'ing a scenario where that report would help you find somebody who is spamming. I'm open to listening, though. What's an example scenario where you would find that useful? Regards, Al Iverson _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
