On Monday 24 May 2004 6:26 pm, Bryan Phinney wrote: > On Monday 24 May 2004 12:23 pm, robin wrote: > > > Well, spam filters don't yank accounts, ISP's do after they have > > > received complaints by recipients that someone is sending out > > > spam from their system. I was cautioning him before he gives > > > advice on how to send out mass mailings to make sure that they > > > have permission from the recipients. Or inevitably, complaints > > > will follow and accounts will be cancelled, or IP's will get > > > blacklisted. Usually fairly swiftly. > > > > Ah right, I see what you mean. However, I doubt if any of the > > people on this particular list would complain to the ISP, they'd > > just mail him. > > Well, if I were to receive email from someone talking to me about a > high-school reunion that I did not solicit and who did not ask my > permission before they began sending mail to my email address, I > would likely complain to the ISP about receiving spam. That does beg > the question of how my email address was obtained, but obtaining an > email address is not the same as obtaining permission to send email > to that address. > > If the To: line showed more than 50 recipients, along with my own > email address, broadcast to every person on that list, I would > positively complain to the ISP about receiving spam. Most ISP's have > policies against mass mailing, definitely have policies against > unsolicited mass-mailing and in most cases will cancel a user account > rather than risk being labeled spam-friendly. > > In any group of 200+ people, you have to expect that at least a few > would be heartless net-nazi's like me. ;-}
You might also consider whether all 200 recipients should be able to see all the other addresses. -- Richard Urwin
____________________________________________________ Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com Join the Club : http://www.mandrakeclub.com ____________________________________________________
