On 18/09/08 11:47:21, Matthew Hannigan wrote: > Did you CC or BCC all your friends? > > If you CC a lot of people, that can be taken > as an indicator of spam.
No. Each email was sent individually, properly addressed to that person only. There was no Cc'ing or Bcc'ing. The sender application was a bash script that I knocked together. > As for standards, well email-wise we're living in > a swamp, and the recommended practice in many > instances is to ignore the standard (e.g. not bouncing > mis-addressed mail) or exploring the more interpretable > edges of the standard (e.g. greylisting) Agreed. But muddying the waters just makes them more dangerous and unnavigable. > The cure is to charge for sending email, but > for most that cure is worse than the disease. No, no, no! You may as well say, "Let it be under the control and administration of a government department." The only real cure is for those who administer MX servers to do so properly, which includes preventing spam from originating out of boxen under their administration. However, whilever the largest ISPs benefit from the sending of spam that will not occur. > Lastly, get your friends to dump hotmail and > get gmail. They won't regret it. I stopped attempting even to stop my friends from sending HTML mail because of the disastrous results (lost friends!) -- although I do bounce emails that contain M$ binary attachments with a polite note saying that my filter has blocked the mail because of the possibility that it contains a virus. I do not intend to tell my friends to switch MX provider. Robert MSOOXML - Not the best standard money can buy. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
