From: Richard S. Holmes (rsholmes_at_MailBox.Syr.Edu)
Date: Wed Apr 16 2003 - 13:24:19 PDT
Stephen Turner <sret1_at_ntlworld.com> writes:
> I'm not at all sure these solutions will really make much of a difference.
> The address will soon leak out,
If I Google for the present address, "frc_at_trolltech.com", and the
older one, "frc_at_troll.no", I find them on only five web sites:
- www.win.tue.nl/~engels/frc/ (archive of round summaries)
- www.sir-toby.com/archives/FRC/ (Jeff's archive of posts)
- www.nomic.net/~nomicwiki/ (Nomic Wiki)
- www.agoranomic.org/pipermail/agora-discussion/ (Agora)
- www.zmailer.org/mhalist (post by Arndt on the Zmailer mailing list)
Some of these mention owner-frc_at_..., not frc_at_... The last of these
messages also is found in the Google Groups archive and is the only
indexed Usenet mention I find.
Presumably we could keep the new address off the first two of these
easily enough (especially given how infrequently the round summaries
archive is updated!), and could delete it if it's ever posted on the
Wiki. Arndt would probably self-censor any future forwardings of
bizarre Microsoftisms to the Zmailer list. Can't do much about the
Agora archive and its ilk, but given that the earlier of these
addresses was used starting six years ago, I think only one
uncontrolled mention in the Google database is a pretty good indicator
that leakage of a new address would be slow.
Once it does leak, it'll probably take some time to get into
widespread use by spammers. At that point I suspect it'd be easy
enough to change it.
> and until then people just discovering FRC
> will find it hard to find the address.
No they won't. The request address will be widely available, and as
soon as they subscribe they'll get the posting address.
For those who have really good spam filtering this discussion may be
moot. (Or maybe not: as has been pointed out, what we see here is
what has already passed some severe filtering.) Not all of us are so
lucky, though, nor do all of us have sufficient control over the email
processing on the systems we use. Besides, I'm reluctant to
spam-filter my FRC mail due to the risk of missing an important
(perhaps disguised) fantasy rule. I see this proposed configuration
change as a fairly easy way of doing something that may be very
effective -- and if not, little or no harm done.
Of course, another easy way to avoid the spam coming in on this list
is to unsubscribe -- which may be the course taken by some members if
the problem continues to worsen.
--
- Rich Holmes
Syracuse, NY
"We're waist deep in the Big Muddy
And the big fool says to push on." -- Pete Seeger
--
Rule Date: 2003-04-16 20:24:35 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST