On Mar 2, 2010, at 11:32 AM, Chris Lewis wrote:
On 3/2/2010 12:12 PM, Daniel Feenberg wrote:
There is one argument, not made by Kulawiec that does deserve a response.
That is the underlying problem with the TIS button that is real. It will
generate ARFs that are really just list-unsubscribe requests from
perfectly legitimate sources. It will generate these in large numbers and
it will be impractical to reduce them with user education. Anyone
proposing to process the flood of such messages will have to come up with
an economical way of doing so that doesn't inconvenience the list owners.
Having the report recipient automatically utilize the list unsubscribe
headers present in the headers immediately comes to mind.
In fact, I think most of the opposition to the TIS button comes from the
owners of such lists who feel they would be the victims. To some extent
they are justified - they are following the rules, why should they pay a
penalty. But if the penalty were a small change in their operation, say an
improvement in the standardization of list-unsubscribe headers - it might
be justifiable.
I think most of us would be satisfied with improvements in the _adoption_ of
the existing list unsubscribe headers.
The existing spec is too loose to really be usable automagically, which means
that the only thing that can be usefully adopted is a subset of RFC 2369.
Vagueness about what that subset should be is one thing hindering adoption.
(Redundancy as compared to in-body unsub links and out of band FBL reports is
another, I suspect).
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg