At 3:30 PM -0500 4/6/03, wayne wrote:
However, I think it would be a bit better if a very few high volume
posters such as yourself would start adding either In-Reply-To or
References headers just like the vast majority of posters do.
Sure, everyone can just run right out and patch the binary.
While I won't presume to speak for "we", I will say that I think that
getting legacy mailers to support well long supported and understood
headers is vastly easier than getting everyone to add anything new.
Welcome to the problem of updating MUAs. Where there's no perceived
benefit, the changes don't get made. All the commercial mail
products seem to find it better to thread by subject--certainly it
makes more sense to do so in this forum, where the conversations go
on forever (it seems), but the topic constantly changes.
But back the subject. Would whitelisting by plain message-id really
work? Certainly seems less intrusive than most systems. I'm not
sure what you'd want to do with web archives of conversations though.
On the one hand, you'd like people to be able to respond. On the
other, you don't want to feed message-ids to spammers. Probably
you'd recommend stripping them.
Would you see it as a preliminary way of doing an email address
whitelist, to just bypass the need for an initial check--and
subsequent new messages from the person would go through as well?
And do most MUAs generate their own Message-IDs?
--
Kee Hinckley
http://www.messagefire.com/ Junk-Free Email Filtering
http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/ Writings on Technology and Society
I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg