Mailing list administrivia

[Brian K. White]

On 4/25/2015 9:09 PM, Paul via Filepro-list wrote:
> On 4/25/2015 7:36 PM, Fairlight via Filepro-list wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 07:33:47PM -0400, filePro Mailing List thus
>> spoke:
>>> | While I don't like the new rules, we had to adopt them on all our
>>> hosted
>>> | email servers.
>>> | Mark, you stop the DDOS and spam attacks worldwide and let me sleep
>>> and I
>>> | will turn
>>> | the rules off. Until then, follow the new rules so I can sleep or I
>>> have to
>>> | do
>>> | without the filePro list. NO Exceptions! Without the rules, our
>>> servers were
>>> | blacklisted daily.
>>> | With the rules, very seldom. So get off your soap box and live with
>>> the new
>>> | world order!
>>> |
>>> | Paul
>>>
>>>
>>> OK, Paul who????
>>>
>>>  From years if experience, I know this Paul's last name, but this is
>>> no way to run a mailing list....
>> I was just thinking pretty much both...Paul who, and this new system is
>> simply not working.  That's painfully apparent.
>>
>> I -don't- know Paul's last name, but he just lost the right to have me
>> take
>> him seriously.
>>
>> Personally, I would take down the list if those are the only two
>> alternatives.  It's Bill's call, obviously.
>>
>> The one piece of constructive input I can offer is that the Real Name
>> segment of the email address should at least be a quoted version of the
>> originating email address of the actual poster.  People would at least be
>> accountable and identifiable, then, without having to bother Bill.  As it
>> is, hell, anyone could spoof being anyone, as long as they come from the
>> same ISP so the Received headers vaguely match.  The way most people read
>> mail, they don't even see Received headers, and unless someone clues them
>> in, it'd be pretty easy to impersonate anyone just by setting one's Real
>> Name to theirs.  That's patently silly.
>>
>> The irony here is that the measures are meant to combat the exact kind of
>> anonymous abuse which it actually enables in a mailing list environment.
>> As I said, it's ill-conceived, no matter who conceived it.
>>
>> mark->
> Mark
>
> I demand an apology for your stupid comments!
>
> Paul McNary
> pmcnary at cameron.net

He is right.
I rarely apologize for being right.

When they said "Paul Who?" that was all the damning evidence necessary. 
It was the most elegant, eloquent, and succinct expression of the 
problem. Posting another message including your name and email in the 
body entirely misses the point. Which is starting to look like a pattern.

-- 
bkw