Tim: >> Sending spam to webmaster, hostmaster, or postmaster addresses is a >> surefire way to get added to the spamfilter. Mine get cluttered >> with crap. Sanjay Arora: > Maybe I'm new and have rose-tinted glasses, but simply because I will > get SPAM at that address, its not adequate reason for not having one, > IMHO. Well, there are *obligations* to provide abuse@ and postmaster@ addresses, and recommendations for the others, for domain names as well as *obligations* that contact information be in the whois data. Though we all can think of good reasons why we don't want our information in there. But it may well be that the *only* way you'll get a reminder to renew your domain name before it expires is to have an e-mail address in your whois information. Likewise if you need to converse with your registrar about problems (they'll probably ignore what looks like complete strangers trying to interfere with domain records). I'd say you'd *need* to have details in your whois data unless your registrar allows you to provide them directly with an address that won't be provided in the whois. There's a crude trick for avoiding most spam. Spammers don't seem to spam addresses with "spam" or "nospam" in them. I don't think they do so to be nice, I think it's because they presume them to be faked. So use a nospam subdomain with your whois data. e.g. hostmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx You will always get spam anyway, and I think you'll get more from other sources than from your whois data. My last several years of experience on the internet would support that idea. -- Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists.
