I would suggest the word appropriate to replace good...
From: John M. Wobus <jmwobus(_at_)mailbox(_dot_)syr(_dot_)edu>
To: ietf-822(_at_)imc(_dot_)org <ietf-822(_at_)imc(_dot_)org>
Date: Friday, February 26, 1999 8:40 AM
Subject: Re: IETF Draft: Good Mailing List Behaviour
I like the document but found the title abiguous: was it going to
describe the desirable behavior of a list member? Or was it going to
describe desirable behavior of list processing software and the mail
configuration for the list? Obviously both are worthy topics, and I
applaud any effort to take on any part of these tasks.
No good title has occurred to me, but it seems to me that the word
"good" is unnecessary (just an extra word for the reader to scan: by
default, RFC's describe things considered good) and what the document
describes is "practices", so it might be good to get that into the
title somehow. Even so, "Mailing List Practices" seems lacking
Charles F. Lindsay responded:
11. Spam Control
Yes, but even more importantly you need to add a section on Mailbombing,
pointing out the desirability for subscription requests to be returned to
the subscriber for confirmation, preferably with a code to be sent back
with the confirmation.
Just to throw in more FUD, I've heard of at least one instance of
someone who was bombed to distraction with subscription
confirmation-requests. I'm not sure if that was the actual intent or
of it was actually a failed attempt at making the victim's life even
more miserable by subscribing them to unwanted lists. In any case, the
arms race marches on.