Yeah, it is nice to give the shaft once in a while rather than receive it. He was just spouting off all kinds of BS. I'm assuming the goal of that script was to convince people not to contest the charges under fear of a legal hassle. I imagine it works on a lot of people. Fortunately I'm not one of them. I've always been able to get things done on the phone. Staying cool helps. I did it to him though just to get a rise out of him. The comments he'd made and the way he'd made them were of the type where you'd normally expect the recipient to come unfucked and launch into tirade. Staying cool wasn't what he expected. Thinking back on it I think I might have asked him (cooling asked him) what the script said to do next if the caller wasn't a ignoramous that didn't know his rights and just hung up on him? Yeah, I think that's close to what I said. He definitely came unfucked at that point. That still makes me smile.:-)
It was in Pittsburg, KS. The 1099 form was just one example of which there are many. One of the worst things was my address was the same as Pittsburg State University's campus library, only I was north and they were south. If you didn't specify north or south the randomly picked. I received mail for the library daily. I happened to also work at the university so I'd drop it off, daily. I'd complain to the post office every couple of weeks. Sometimes I'd take a week's worth of library mail to the post office to complain. I'd mark a corner of the mail with a marker so I could recognize it easily later. Then I waited to see how many of them found their way back to my mailbox that day. When the mail man got there I made him wait whilst I sorted the mail he was going to put in my box. I remember that day of the 37 pieces of mail he was going to put in my box 2 were for meand 35 were for the library. Of that 35 pieces of the library's mail 3 were new and 32 were ones I'd just returned to the post office after complaining. I swear bumbling idiots doesn't begin to describe them. Maybe they weren't stupid. Maybe they were just incompotent or lazy. I haven't had many of those troubles elsewhere. I finally complained up the food chain to someone with oversight on the area and gave them all sorts of examples. I assume they came down on them hard because I had two messages on my answering machine by the local head postal (Dan, I think) before I got home from work.
The only other real problem I can think of with mail happened when I was at Kansas State Unv. It was my first year and I lived in the dorms. My mother mailed me a package of various things, a care package. She sent one to her school's secretary's son that was in my HS class and attending another Unv. The next day the package arrived. Also on the next day the secretary sent a care package to her son at Ft. Hays and sent me one at K-State. That package took a month to get to me. Now it could have been campus mail's fault. Still that was annoying. Everytime I talked with someone from home they asked if I'd received it. Annoying.
AFAIC, if a seller won't use escrow or accept credit cards directly, then I only will do transactions for trivial amounts. If the transaction's for a large amount, I won't use Paypal, period.
Unfortunately it's people like yourself that scammers are now counting on. The successful scammers don't go after the big-ticket items like laptops anymore. They go after the small-ticket items. Those are items that cost so little you aren't likely to care enough to follow through on any complaints. So what if you lost $25; at least it's not $2500. The successful ones aren't the ones that fly around the radar installations for short periods of time, continually changing planes. The successful ones fly under the radar for long periods of time and never even have to refuel.
They really are a banking institution. They should be regulated as such IMHO. That would directly and indirectly fix a lot of problems. The FDIC insurance would be a nice side-effect.
I agree. I did the same thing back when Paypal first came out and started getting popular. That was before all the bad experiences with Paypal started getting their own websites. I bought something, a switch or a router I think, for around $900 (seems like that was it). The guy seemed plenty legit enough. I had bought thousands of dollars worth of stuff off of ebay at that time (tens of thousands now) and hadn't had any trouble with any of my auctions to date. The listing looked legit. So did his other auctions. Everything seemed just fine. I sent the money and the item never came, surprise surprise. It took more forever to find any way of submitting a fraud complaint to ebay back then. Let me tell you, the only place more difficult to get on the phone than Paypal at that time was ebay. Damn. I submitted that complaint. Then I submitted a Paypal complaint. ebay wasn't interested. Paypal yanked my chain for almost a month (that's when they answered what seemed like the only phone in the whole place). Finally, after getting the run-around yet again with no status on any action even being considered I finally said Fsck It. I told them I was going to contest the charges with my credit card company and be done with it. I've never seen such a turn around in my life. No, they didn't transform into an A+ customer service center hell bent on making me, the consumer, happy. No, what the suddenly changed was they dropped the lethargic 'let me tranfer you to such and such dept' or 'let me check with my supervisor' (and run off to lunch with me on hold or 'I'll cal you right back' (HA!). Instead the line was suddenly a hot bed of activity as the operator quickly forwarded me off to another place with a 'this is the person you need to speak with who will solve every problem you've ever had, including warts.' Was this guy helpful? Are you kidding? Before he even picked up the line he was already spouting off some canned speech about how it was illegal for me to contest the charge and how they'd sic their lawyers on me and drag me off to court kicking and screaming. It was an intimidation setup. I swear this guy's whole purpose was to take calls from people who said they were contesting the charges. He didn't know my name. He knew nothing about my problems. All he knew was what was on his script. Surprising I didn't rip his head off. I don't remember what exactly I asked him but I do remember that I was dry, calm, cool, and concise. I do remember that whatever I asked him absolutely infuriated him. I hung up on him and promptly called my CC company. I contested the charges and never heard about the matter again. They didn't cancel my Paypal account either. I've read that they'll try to bill your bank account (needed for verifying an account) for dollar amounts you contest. Fortunately for me at that time I'd moved a few months before then and my old checking account was closed. They never noticed though and I wasn't about to tell them otherwise. A couple years later I did update my account though. Shortly after that I moved again and switch to another bank entirely. Now all Paypal knows is the info on a couple CCs. The bank account it knows about has been closed for well over a year.:-) Only ever buy with a CC on the Internet.
I'm using Mozilla 1.7 and it looks like hell to me. Then again Slashdot is now failing to load about 80% of the time or more. The style sheets appear to be seriously borked or something alone those lines. I have to reload half a dozen times to get at least 4 out of 6/. pages to load.
Having bought tens of thousands dollars worth of stuff off of ebay (no, I'm really not joking, I'm a geek and a pack-rat) I can say that without a doubt the majority of the fraudulent auctions are for "small ticket" items like DVDs, games, HDs, books, clothing, etc. "Why," you ask? You said it yourself. If (read: when) you get ripped off on a small-ticket item the loss is minimal and you're less likely to get your panties in a wad. On the other hand if you get hosed in an auction for a $3000 computer you 1) are not going to be happy, 2) are more than motivated enough to pursue the matter at least a little bit, and 3) quite possibly might have the technical know-how to track down said individual scammer and put up a website detailing the scammer's exploits. Small-ticket items are the risky ones. Oh, I almost forgot to mention. DVDs, games, and most readily accessible software like Window is probably going to be pirated. Unusual software like Cabletron Spectrum Enterprise is much less likely to be pirated.:-)
Actually in the case of Justin Spencer the payment was made with a Western Union cashier's check. If he had sent the cashier's check via the USPS he'd still be covered under the USPS Postal Inspectors though. Your points about the money order are dead on though. Kudos to the postal inspectors. Now if only they could fix the problem with a certain local PO in a city I used to live in. I swear they could mis-deliver/lose more mail in a year than I ever had anywhere else in my life to date. I had an IRS 1099 form mailed to me in-state on Jan 30. On May 22 it suddenly appeared in my mailbox. There weren't extra postal marks on it or anything. They just lost it.
Seriously I'm sure the victims would really appreciate a few hours of your time. They are offering a reward to those that help out. Email them and ask them what they need. I imagine getting a picture of Sal and getting the folks at the check cashing place that he cashed Justin's check at to identify him as the person that cashed the check would be very appreciated. That would be a huge accomplishment right there. If I was less than 1300 miles away I'd help out with some recon. You know it's a great community on Slashdot when folks get together to help one another out and nab a scammer. Kudos.
Actually if you RTFA (long page of emails took me a while to read so I understand) you'd notice that Sal threatened to shoot him, send people near his Texas home to rough him up, and more. There's more than enough for multiple charges against Sal here. Justin really needs to push the matter with his local PD and the Philly PD. He should ask them about getting a protective order as well. Not that he should be afraid of this punk, but instead it would show he's serious about the threats.
Right. The way he was speaking was perfect for the room filled with loud supporters. That directional mic problem was only ever explained once in the main stream media that I know of. It was a couple weeks after the fact, after Dean's campaign was dead. Some media person, I forget who or where, looked back on the Dead Campaign and the mic incident and asked if they (the media) was too hard on him. Well duh. I think Dean would have been good president. So would some of the others. I hope you don't have to be rich or a actor/puppet for the numerically powerful. I have an interest in politics and may find myself in office some day. I'm not rich; I'm not one to be manipulated; and I'm not good-looking enough to be called an actor (maybe an extra's extra).
I saw that a couple days ago. It apparently went away. I also, about 75% of the time can not fully load a Slashdot page in Mozilla. More often than not I get the sidebars, banner at the top, and the green and white background with no text. Reloading the pages 3 or 4 times usually does the trick. This has been going on for months now. I think there is a serious screwup in the style sheets somewhere.
All too true. Once the media got that video clip they just wore it out playing it over and over and over again. Dare I say they were politically motivated to do so? I think so.
I've seen this at two Unvs I've worked at. The first was about 50/50 in the labs when I first started there (that's 50% Mac and 50% everything else). That was due mainly to the guy that hired me being a Mac fan, as was I. The Mac labs consistently had more people in them than the PC labs. Few people knew how to use the Sparcs so they were usually barren. After he transfered to another dept the Macs started getting replaced. There are still a handful of colleges within the Unv that are exclusively Macs including the Education college, Journalism, most of Music, and most of English. Architecture had a fair number as well. Many of the offices were all Mac including the Engineering office, Housing and Dining, and others. Still most of the public-use Macs are now gone. The PC labs were down often. I left before the worms like Codered and Nimda started. The Sparcs chugged away but were too complex for most people.
Now the next Unv I worked for was about 40% Mac on campus in general. I determined this by MAC address. Since I only identified Apple OUIs it's possible that there were more and were using anoter brand of nic (Farallon, Adaptec, Asante, etc...). My department (IT) had numerous Macs in part because the director was a Mac fan. They had a lot of Macs when we parted ways too. Again there were a number of colleges with mostly or exclusively Macs. Education of course is one of them. The PC labs usually worked. They were maintained by the individual colleges though so the user experience varied from lab to lab. The SGIs were usually broken or taken off the network due to being horribly insecure. They only had a few Sparcs. Macs were liberally scattered across the campus too. All but one of my numerous machines were Macs. I saw many of the Macs disappearing though. It was far less than the other Unv though. I think this can be contributed to the decentralized management of the labs and tech support. Those techs and the people making the recommendations to the people that make the purchasing decisions are closer to the end users. I think they make more decisions not based on initial cost but on what the user wants/needs and what they want to maintain.
So punish everyone for the actions of the few. That's ingenius. Why didn't they think of this sooner. They could outlaw alcohol and prevent all sorts of drunken mistakes. Oh wait, they tried that. They could outlaw free speech to prevent dissent from the overturning of the crown. Oh wait, they tried that too. Gee, it seems like every time they try to punish everyone they end up on the losing end of the stick.
And lets not overlook the even more obvious. Many more people use a modchip to play a burnt copy of their own game from their own media. Why? Because scratching the CD will cost you $50 to replace as compared to spending 5 minutes and $0.10 on a CDR to burn a copy for everyday use. No not everyone using burned copies is doing something illegal. That's like saying everyone walking down the street carrying a length of pipe, sucker rod, or a crowbar is guilty of committing a crime. In reality you just arrest a plumber, oil field worker, and carpenter.
That's the arguement the fanatic anti-guns activists have been trying to use on guns for years. Outlaw guns because besides hunting, sport, and fun they can also be used to kill. I usually respond with automobiles. Outlaw cars because besides being able to transport wee little kids to and from school they can also be used to kill! That usually shuts them up.
LOL. Well I have both Mozilla and Firefox open at the same time all the time. I keep a few troublesome sites open in Firefox and do my main browsing in Mozilla. Those sites use weird Java crap that tends to give Mozilla fits. It's easier for me to use both than have Moz crash and take everything I'm doing in it with it.
Actually, I take that back. I will respond to your reply with a point and a request. First the point. Spam far pre-dated that 1997 RFC. Apparently you weren't using email until after 1997. Secondly the request. Please submit your domains to RFC-I so we responsible administrators can easily distinguish your domains from those with responsible administrators. If as you say you have no problem with people blacklisting you then you should have no problem submitting your domains. Let me make it even easier for you. Here is the link to postmaster @ yourdomain. Here is the link to abuse @ yourdomain. Good bye.
Spam was not a problem in 1997? Where were you in 1997? Where ever it was you must not have had an email address. As for your other reply, well hell, I just don't know where to start. I seem to be having a circular discussion though that's back again to where it's started. So I don't think I'll start it rotating again. Have a nice day.
Yes the RFCs do require a human to read the mail to abuse and postmaster. Why would they require the addresses to be valid if they didn't require them to be read?
Illegal? Certainly. You're asking people to DoS someone else. How about we put that in different terms. You're asking people to shoot at someone. You're asking people to trespass on someone's property. You're asking people to cause physical harm to someone. See how it parallels? Of course inciting someone to DoS someone is illegal. Do I know which law you're breaking? If I had the time to memorize law books I'd be making a lot more than I am now.
Have you ever been a member of the anti-spam community (that includes being a responsible mail administrator that supports or uses anti-spam resources)? You said earlier that you're using blacklists. These blacklists are created in part by using the postmaster and abuse mailboxes you wish to abolish. I gaurantee you if Exodus, Spring, or MCI terminated their postmaster or abuse addresses they would find themselves at the brunt of a negative PR campaign the likes of which you only see elsewhere during presidential campaign years. They would also find themselves on blacklists for choosing to not play by community standards and established rules. You want to reap the benefits of these efforts and yet you want a critical part of the process to be eliminated from the RFCs. Isn't that rather hypocritical? If I as an admin get spam from another provider's customer or if I notice unusual things from that provider entering our network via email I'll give that provider a heads up via email. I won't go hunting and pecking through their website for another address to send cmoplaints, LARTs, and general heads up messages. I won't pick up the phone and waste my company's or my own money on long distance and my extra time to try and explain to some tier-1 script reader that they have a problem and need to address it. The person responsible for the mail system is the person or group of persons that read postmaster. The person or group responsible for abuse complaints read abuse. That's the way it works. Yes you can perform AV checks on both. Yes you can tag spam messages for what they are. You can't delete the spam of course because you could be deleting spam forwarded in complaints. The point is there are ways of dealing with spam on established role accounts. We (the responsible admins of the Internet community) do it. Is it unreasonable to ask you to as well? This isn't that complex of an issue.
I would agree with that as long as that's the sole use for the domain. I think that's a great use for old unused domains (or people like us that want to collect spam to benefit from it). I have to wonder now about something else, but related. Do the authors of said RFCs consider typos in the domain or tld portion to also require said DSN? That would be an interesting question. If so then perhaps they'd view catch-alls in a dim light. Say I owned goober.com and used it as a catch-all. Someone else (maybe a famous company) owned gobber.com. Someone typos mail to joe@gober.com with joe@goober.com. Should me MTA return a DSN? I'm not sure. The address is valid on my system. If both domains were used for real mail and both had the user "joe" no DSN would be sent. It's an interesting question. I wonder what the answer would be.
Unbelievable. What the hell does that RFC being 5 years old have to do with it? RFCs 821 and 822, by far two of the most used RFCs ever, were almost 19 years old when they were revised. 19 years old! What did you think of those while using them? Was that a catastrophe for you? I stand by what I said. We have RFC-I for people just like yourself. Do you let this disregard for stands contaminate your other work? If you as an admin worked for me you wouldn't last very long. Unbelievable.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, it is nice to give the shaft once in a while rather than receive it. He was just spouting off all kinds of BS. I'm assuming the goal of that script was to convince people not to contest the charges under fear of a legal hassle. I imagine it works on a lot of people. Fortunately I'm not one of them. I've always been able to get things done on the phone. Staying cool helps. I did it to him though just to get a rise out of him. The comments he'd made and the way he'd made them were of the type where you'd normally expect the recipient to come unfucked and launch into tirade. Staying cool wasn't what he expected. Thinking back on it I think I might have asked him (cooling asked him) what the script said to do next if the caller wasn't a ignoramous that didn't know his rights and just hung up on him? Yeah, I think that's close to what I said. He definitely came unfucked at that point. That still makes me smile. :-)
The only other real problem I can think of with mail happened when I was at Kansas State Unv. It was my first year and I lived in the dorms. My mother mailed me a package of various things, a care package. She sent one to her school's secretary's son that was in my HS class and attending another Unv. The next day the package arrived. Also on the next day the secretary sent a care package to her son at Ft. Hays and sent me one at K-State. That package took a month to get to me. Now it could have been campus mail's fault. Still that was annoying. Everytime I talked with someone from home they asked if I'd received it. Annoying.
Unfortunately it's people like yourself that scammers are now counting on. The successful scammers don't go after the big-ticket items like laptops anymore. They go after the small-ticket items. Those are items that cost so little you aren't likely to care enough to follow through on any complaints. So what if you lost $25; at least it's not $2500. The successful ones aren't the ones that fly around the radar installations for short periods of time, continually changing planes. The successful ones fly under the radar for long periods of time and never even have to refuel.
They really are a banking institution. They should be regulated as such IMHO. That would directly and indirectly fix a lot of problems. The FDIC insurance would be a nice side-effect.
I agree. I did the same thing back when Paypal first came out and started getting popular. That was before all the bad experiences with Paypal started getting their own websites. I bought something, a switch or a router I think, for around $900 (seems like that was it). The guy seemed plenty legit enough. I had bought thousands of dollars worth of stuff off of ebay at that time (tens of thousands now) and hadn't had any trouble with any of my auctions to date. The listing looked legit. So did his other auctions. Everything seemed just fine. I sent the money and the item never came, surprise surprise. It took more forever to find any way of submitting a fraud complaint to ebay back then. Let me tell you, the only place more difficult to get on the phone than Paypal at that time was ebay. Damn. I submitted that complaint. Then I submitted a Paypal complaint. ebay wasn't interested. Paypal yanked my chain for almost a month (that's when they answered what seemed like the only phone in the whole place). Finally, after getting the run-around yet again with no status on any action even being considered I finally said Fsck It. I told them I was going to contest the charges with my credit card company and be done with it. I've never seen such a turn around in my life. No, they didn't transform into an A+ customer service center hell bent on making me, the consumer, happy. No, what the suddenly changed was they dropped the lethargic 'let me tranfer you to such and such dept' or 'let me check with my supervisor' (and run off to lunch with me on hold or 'I'll cal you right back' (HA!). Instead the line was suddenly a hot bed of activity as the operator quickly forwarded me off to another place with a 'this is the person you need to speak with who will solve every problem you've ever had, including warts.' Was this guy helpful? Are you kidding? Before he even picked up the line he was already spouting off some canned speech about how it was illegal for me to contest the charge and how they'd sic their lawyers on me and drag me off to court kicking and screaming. It was an intimidation setup. I swear this guy's whole purpose was to take calls from people who said they were contesting the charges. He didn't know my name. He knew nothing about my problems. All he knew was what was on his script. Surprising I didn't rip his head off. I don't remember what exactly I asked him but I do remember that I was dry, calm, cool, and concise. I do remember that whatever I asked him absolutely infuriated him. I hung up on him and promptly called my CC company. I contested the charges and never heard about the matter again. They didn't cancel my Paypal account either. I've read that they'll try to bill your bank account (needed for verifying an account) for dollar amounts you contest. Fortunately for me at that time I'd moved a few months before then and my old checking account was closed. They never noticed though and I wasn't about to tell them otherwise. A couple years later I did update my account though. Shortly after that I moved again and switch to another bank entirely. Now all Paypal knows is the info on a couple CCs. The bank account it knows about has been closed for well over a year. :-) Only ever buy with a CC on the Internet.
I'm using Mozilla 1.7 and it looks like hell to me. Then again Slashdot is now failing to load about 80% of the time or more. The style sheets appear to be seriously borked or something alone those lines. I have to reload half a dozen times to get at least 4 out of 6 /. pages to load.
Having bought tens of thousands dollars worth of stuff off of ebay (no, I'm really not joking, I'm a geek and a pack-rat) I can say that without a doubt the majority of the fraudulent auctions are for "small ticket" items like DVDs, games, HDs, books, clothing, etc. "Why," you ask? You said it yourself. If (read: when) you get ripped off on a small-ticket item the loss is minimal and you're less likely to get your panties in a wad. On the other hand if you get hosed in an auction for a $3000 computer you 1) are not going to be happy, 2) are more than motivated enough to pursue the matter at least a little bit, and 3) quite possibly might have the technical know-how to track down said individual scammer and put up a website detailing the scammer's exploits. Small-ticket items are the risky ones. Oh, I almost forgot to mention. DVDs, games, and most readily accessible software like Window is probably going to be pirated. Unusual software like Cabletron Spectrum Enterprise is much less likely to be pirated. :-)
You can see what the bought/sold for 3 months. That and a hill of beans will get you gas on any given Sunday. Beyond that you're on your own.
Actually in the case of Justin Spencer the payment was made with a Western Union cashier's check. If he had sent the cashier's check via the USPS he'd still be covered under the USPS Postal Inspectors though. Your points about the money order are dead on though. Kudos to the postal inspectors. Now if only they could fix the problem with a certain local PO in a city I used to live in. I swear they could mis-deliver/lose more mail in a year than I ever had anywhere else in my life to date. I had an IRS 1099 form mailed to me in-state on Jan 30. On May 22 it suddenly appeared in my mailbox. There weren't extra postal marks on it or anything. They just lost it.
Seriously I'm sure the victims would really appreciate a few hours of your time. They are offering a reward to those that help out. Email them and ask them what they need. I imagine getting a picture of Sal and getting the folks at the check cashing place that he cashed Justin's check at to identify him as the person that cashed the check would be very appreciated. That would be a huge accomplishment right there. If I was less than 1300 miles away I'd help out with some recon. You know it's a great community on Slashdot when folks get together to help one another out and nab a scammer. Kudos.
Actually if you RTFA (long page of emails took me a while to read so I understand) you'd notice that Sal threatened to shoot him, send people near his Texas home to rough him up, and more. There's more than enough for multiple charges against Sal here. Justin really needs to push the matter with his local PD and the Philly PD. He should ask them about getting a protective order as well. Not that he should be afraid of this punk, but instead it would show he's serious about the threats.
Right. The way he was speaking was perfect for the room filled with loud supporters. That directional mic problem was only ever explained once in the main stream media that I know of. It was a couple weeks after the fact, after Dean's campaign was dead. Some media person, I forget who or where, looked back on the Dead Campaign and the mic incident and asked if they (the media) was too hard on him. Well duh. I think Dean would have been good president. So would some of the others. I hope you don't have to be rich or a actor/puppet for the numerically powerful. I have an interest in politics and may find myself in office some day. I'm not rich; I'm not one to be manipulated; and I'm not good-looking enough to be called an actor (maybe an extra's extra).
I saw that a couple days ago. It apparently went away. I also, about 75% of the time can not fully load a Slashdot page in Mozilla. More often than not I get the sidebars, banner at the top, and the green and white background with no text. Reloading the pages 3 or 4 times usually does the trick. This has been going on for months now. I think there is a serious screwup in the style sheets somewhere.
Here's a link to the book over at Amazon. It sounds like a good book. It's going on my wishlist.
All too true. Once the media got that video clip they just wore it out playing it over and over and over again. Dare I say they were politically motivated to do so? I think so.
Now the next Unv I worked for was about 40% Mac on campus in general. I determined this by MAC address. Since I only identified Apple OUIs it's possible that there were more and were using anoter brand of nic (Farallon, Adaptec, Asante, etc...). My department (IT) had numerous Macs in part because the director was a Mac fan. They had a lot of Macs when we parted ways too. Again there were a number of colleges with mostly or exclusively Macs. Education of course is one of them. The PC labs usually worked. They were maintained by the individual colleges though so the user experience varied from lab to lab. The SGIs were usually broken or taken off the network due to being horribly insecure. They only had a few Sparcs. Macs were liberally scattered across the campus too. All but one of my numerous machines were Macs. I saw many of the Macs disappearing though. It was far less than the other Unv though. I think this can be contributed to the decentralized management of the labs and tech support. Those techs and the people making the recommendations to the people that make the purchasing decisions are closer to the end users. I think they make more decisions not based on initial cost but on what the user wants/needs and what they want to maintain.
And lets not overlook the even more obvious. Many more people use a modchip to play a burnt copy of their own game from their own media. Why? Because scratching the CD will cost you $50 to replace as compared to spending 5 minutes and $0.10 on a CDR to burn a copy for everyday use. No not everyone using burned copies is doing something illegal. That's like saying everyone walking down the street carrying a length of pipe, sucker rod, or a crowbar is guilty of committing a crime. In reality you just arrest a plumber, oil field worker, and carpenter.
That's the arguement the fanatic anti-guns activists have been trying to use on guns for years. Outlaw guns because besides hunting, sport, and fun they can also be used to kill. I usually respond with automobiles. Outlaw cars because besides being able to transport wee little kids to and from school they can also be used to kill! That usually shuts them up.
What we need to make sure happens when SCO loses their shirts is that the entire legal team is sanctioned under Rule 11.
LOL. Well I have both Mozilla and Firefox open at the same time all the time. I keep a few troublesome sites open in Firefox and do my main browsing in Mozilla. Those sites use weird Java crap that tends to give Mozilla fits. It's easier for me to use both than have Moz crash and take everything I'm doing in it with it.
Actually, I take that back. I will respond to your reply with a point and a request. First the point. Spam far pre-dated that 1997 RFC. Apparently you weren't using email until after 1997. Secondly the request. Please submit your domains to RFC-I so we responsible administrators can easily distinguish your domains from those with responsible administrators. If as you say you have no problem with people blacklisting you then you should have no problem submitting your domains. Let me make it even easier for you. Here is the link to postmaster @ yourdomain. Here is the link to abuse @ yourdomain. Good bye.
Spam was not a problem in 1997? Where were you in 1997? Where ever it was you must not have had an email address. As for your other reply, well hell, I just don't know where to start. I seem to be having a circular discussion though that's back again to where it's started. So I don't think I'll start it rotating again. Have a nice day.
Yes the RFCs do require a human to read the mail to abuse and postmaster. Why would they require the addresses to be valid if they didn't require them to be read?
Illegal? Certainly. You're asking people to DoS someone else. How about we put that in different terms. You're asking people to shoot at someone. You're asking people to trespass on someone's property. You're asking people to cause physical harm to someone. See how it parallels? Of course inciting someone to DoS someone is illegal. Do I know which law you're breaking? If I had the time to memorize law books I'd be making a lot more than I am now.
Have you ever been a member of the anti-spam community (that includes being a responsible mail administrator that supports or uses anti-spam resources)? You said earlier that you're using blacklists. These blacklists are created in part by using the postmaster and abuse mailboxes you wish to abolish. I gaurantee you if Exodus, Spring, or MCI terminated their postmaster or abuse addresses they would find themselves at the brunt of a negative PR campaign the likes of which you only see elsewhere during presidential campaign years. They would also find themselves on blacklists for choosing to not play by community standards and established rules. You want to reap the benefits of these efforts and yet you want a critical part of the process to be eliminated from the RFCs. Isn't that rather hypocritical? If I as an admin get spam from another provider's customer or if I notice unusual things from that provider entering our network via email I'll give that provider a heads up via email. I won't go hunting and pecking through their website for another address to send cmoplaints, LARTs, and general heads up messages. I won't pick up the phone and waste my company's or my own money on long distance and my extra time to try and explain to some tier-1 script reader that they have a problem and need to address it. The person responsible for the mail system is the person or group of persons that read postmaster. The person or group responsible for abuse complaints read abuse. That's the way it works. Yes you can perform AV checks on both. Yes you can tag spam messages for what they are. You can't delete the spam of course because you could be deleting spam forwarded in complaints. The point is there are ways of dealing with spam on established role accounts. We (the responsible admins of the Internet community) do it. Is it unreasonable to ask you to as well? This isn't that complex of an issue.
I would agree with that as long as that's the sole use for the domain. I think that's a great use for old unused domains (or people like us that want to collect spam to benefit from it). I have to wonder now about something else, but related. Do the authors of said RFCs consider typos in the domain or tld portion to also require said DSN? That would be an interesting question. If so then perhaps they'd view catch-alls in a dim light. Say I owned goober.com and used it as a catch-all. Someone else (maybe a famous company) owned gobber.com. Someone typos mail to joe@gober.com with joe@goober.com. Should me MTA return a DSN? I'm not sure. The address is valid on my system. If both domains were used for real mail and both had the user "joe" no DSN would be sent. It's an interesting question. I wonder what the answer would be.
Unbelievable. What the hell does that RFC being 5 years old have to do with it? RFCs 821 and 822, by far two of the most used RFCs ever, were almost 19 years old when they were revised. 19 years old! What did you think of those while using them? Was that a catastrophe for you? I stand by what I said. We have RFC-I for people just like yourself. Do you let this disregard for stands contaminate your other work? If you as an admin worked for me you wouldn't last very long. Unbelievable.