On 17Jun2007 17:06, Frank Cox <theatre@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: | On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 08:57:52 +1000 | Cameron Simpson <cs@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: | > | Now that's a first for me. And a rather clever idea indeed. | > It's a hideous idea. Email should just work. EVery stupid hack like this | > makes that harder for everyone. | Right up there with using non-standard pipe symbols for your quoting | character, perhaps? They don't make things not work. I just find them easier on the eyes than the jagged > chars. Anyway, it seems the NOSPAM address is for real; I had taken it for the usual "I've put a busted email address in my headers" hack. I withdraw my flame. | > | The best one I've seen previously was setting your email address in newsgroups | > | to abuse@xxxxxxxxxxx, so the spammers would file their own complaints. Your | > | idea is just as cute as that. | > | > Hmm, no, it's not as awful as that. That swamps the abuse@ addresses | > with crap, preventing them being used for genuine reports of trouble. | > Really clever - actively working to break a trouble reporting system. | | Not really. The abuse system gets emails from the spammer, blocks same. Hmm. Given the amazingly high forgery rate of spam headers, does this really achieve anything? I still maintain it breaks the abuse channel for the sending of genuine complaints. | But come on, now... You gotta admit that his idea for an email address is very | clever, even if you don't agree with his method. Now I just think it's weird and pointless. Perhaps there's a deeper layer of subtlety I haven't yet seen. -- Cameron Simpson <cs@xxxxxxxxxx> DoD#743 http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/ ... you could spend *all day* customizing the title bar. Believe me. I speak from experience. - Matt Welsh
