On Sat, May 01, 2004 at 12:40:20AM -0800, John Andersen wrote: > On Friday 30 April 2004 15:36, jdow wrote: > > Dan, you are in an industry that is dominated by people who harvest optout
Somebody here (I don't think it was jdow ... maybe Bob?) has got my industry wrong. I help out with a few mailing lists, some of whose subscribers have actually suggested the lists are too hard to get onto and too easy to fall off of (to which I say I'm sorry but that's the way it has to be), but mass email is far from what the folks I work for do for a living. > > as a means of obtaining new addresses to spam. Do you seriously > > wonder that people would ignore opt-out and merely blackball you? And, I'm not offended if somebody blackballs us. We make use of several RBL lists, including SpamCop's, to help sort out what's coming close to 90% spam in our incoming email stream. Of course such lists won't be 100% accurate. How could that be humanly possible!?! SpamAssassin helps a lot, by letting us draw on many sources, so that a single FP doesn't in and of itself deepsix legitimate email. Thank goodness for SpamAssassin! My problem is with RBL operators who cross some line with regard to rudeness, presumption of guilt, etc etc., to where they make themselves a significant nuisance to more than just their intended targets. It's fundamentally an aesthetic judgement, I think, but when it comes to aesthetics, there are or have been some antispammers whose setups are just as butt-ugly as those of some spammers. > Dan said: Speaking as an operator of several double-opt-in mailing > lists > > Double opt in is different than Opt out. > > Double Opt In is what you had to do to subscribe to THIS list. Thanks, John. -- Dan Wilder
