Message-ID: <D1FB30BBA491D1118E6D006097BCAE3903ACDB@mailhost.probe.co.uk>
From: Shawn Hargreaves <ShawnH AT Probe DOT co DOT uk>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Subject: Re: Anti-spammed addresses (was: .PCX files in Allegro)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 12:27:00 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

Eli Zaretskii writes:
> If using anti-spammed addresses would be analogous to staying indoors,
it
> would be not as bad as it is now.  But what it really does is to cause
> replies to those addresses to bounce back to people like me who cannot
> afford reading all the headers to detect such fake addresses and
delete
> them before sending.

True. So a better analogy might be to say these addresses are like 
a suit of armour which is heavy, uncomfortable, and restricts your 
freedom of movement, plus making all the paint balls bounce off 
and splatter the innocent people who are standing near you...

The worst thing is when people use fake addresses for private
email as well as usenet posting. On several occassions I have 
spent five or ten minutes trying to help someone with a problem,
only to have my reply bounce back! These days I just don't
bother talking to anyone who doesn't use their real address, 
and I have some of the common strings like "nospam" and 
"removetoreply" in my newsreader killfile :-)

	Shawn.