Bob Apthorpe wrote:
Very possible? No more than a guess. Can Razor confirm that is the reason?Hi, On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 17:38:59 -0800 Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:It's not a matter of personal opinion. EFF newsletter is not spam period.If one defines spam as 'unsolicited bulk email' and EFF does not confirm subscription requests, then it very possible that the newsletter is being delivered to people who have not requested it, and hence it's spam. Period.
Razor labeled Effector as spam. I merely ask why. And I'm not asking for you to guess.Given that (as you've said), EFF's newsletter subscription process is unconfirmed, you cannot say this conclusively.
If Razor can show me that list administration caused the problem, I will be happy to fix it.Please do not try to shift the cost of administering your list to the Razor maintainers. It is your responsibility to confirm and reconfirm your list membership, not Razor's.
More likely - in your opinion. But what are the facts? I want to see the real reason. Not be left to guess.We (tinw) are claiming that it is more likely that people are receiving your newsletter in error and reporting it as spam than it is that people have requested to receive it and are reporting it in error. The error is more likely in the sending, not the reporting.
With Spamcop I can send a message back to the complainer through and annonymous remailer. Spamcop has forwarded two complaints to EFF. In both cases it was an accident. And - those complaints didn't cause our newsletter to be flagged as spam. We were given the opportunity to correct the problem before seeing any consequences. But here we are being censored by unknown people for unknown reasons. I hardly think that's fair.Also, it's a tad offensive and ironic to get that kind of demand for personal information from the EFF. If the Razor database maintainers demanded the EFFector subscriber list so they could find who was abusing Razor, I suspect the EFF would also not be so forthcoming.
Spamcop has such a system. it's called an anonymous remailier allowing the complainer and the complainee to communicate without revealing the complainer's identity.One of the issues I have a real problem with is that there doesn't seem to be any way for anyone to determine how something got labeled as spam so that the problem can be fixed. There needs to be some accountability in the system.Suggest a means of maintaining accountability without violating individual Razor users' privacy. I have not been on this list long enough to know if other properly-confirmed mailing lists have had problems with malicious false reporting, but it would appear that the current trust system works. An accountability system as you describe would be a target for retailiatory action by spammers without providing any substantial benefits to Razor users.
