wmoran at potentialtech.com
Tue Apr 15 14:07:39 PDT 2003
Wayne Pascoe wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 04:50:21PM -0400, Louis LeBlanc wrote:
>>This is really an underhanded way to 'prevent' spam. Basically,
>>Spamarrest requires you validate yourself to them before they'll allow
>>your mail through to their customers. Of course, if you read their
>>fine print, you're basically giving them permission to send you
>>information about their service. Essentially, they wind up spamming
>>you directly until you buy their service. They make no promises as to
>>the privacy of your contact info, and they provide no easy way to be
>>taken off their list.
> That was my take. And as they're not UK based, I'm not protected by the
> data protection act and have no recourse.
>>My opinion is that if someone wants me to get spammed so they don't
>>have to, doesn't deserve any of my time anyway.
> Fully agreed!
>>There have been threads on this subject in a number of mailing lists,
>>particularly the SpamAssassin list. The general consensus among the
>>antispam community is that they are the wolf in sheeps clothing.
> Ok, so if they're a problem, shouldn't the list manager dump subscribers
> to their service from this list?
> The purpose of this list is for FreeBSD users to support each other.
> While I do ask a fair amount of questions, I'm also trying to answer
> questions more. But if every post is going to result in spam, where is
> people's incentive to support each other?
> This kind of behaviour is not good for the community IMHO...
I agree that the continual reply constitutes spam. I'm also concerned
about the privacy issues raised.
However, this has outgrown the purpose of this list. The proper thing
to do is for everyone who agrees with your viewpoint to mail
postmaster at freebsd.org and make your request there. If anyone wants
my opinion, I fully support blocking spamarrest until they can at least
learn how to recognize and properly deal with a mailing list.
More information about the freebsd-questions