spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: argh ... I wish people would RTFRFC

2004-09-09 05:38:32
"AccuSpam" == AccuSpam 
"Re: argh ... I wish people would RTFRFC"
 Thu, 09 Sep 2004 06:52:33 +0800

    >> The wizard at pobox.com is pretty good, but
    AccuSpam> [...]
    >> In short, there are sloppy people out there and it doesn't help
    >> matters at all.

    AccuSpam> The reason this sloppiness can proliferate more than for
    AccuSpam> example when publishing a web page, is that the
    AccuSpam> publisher gets no feedback from users.

    AccuSpam> The recipients (verifiers) have no incentive or
    AccuSpam> permission to give feedback.

    AccuSpam> This is a structural problem which IMHO must be
    AccuSpam> addressed structurally.  Education alone is not enough,
    AccuSpam> because there is no structural incentive.  For example,
    AccuSpam> the spec could be modified to allow a validator to
    AccuSpam> e-mail the domain (at "postmaster(_at_)domain"?)
    AccuSpam> periodically (weekly?) if there are syntax errors.

Would something akin to rfc-ignorant.org be in order?

        jam