[Wine] Wine

[L. Rahyen]

On Thursday March 20 2008 14:54:58 Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Thursday 20 March 2008 01:11:45 am L. Rahyen wrote:
> > > Address munging is considered harmful.  It's the postmaster's
> > > responsibility not to accept spam in the first place.
> > > http://www.interhack.net/pubs/munging-harmful/
> >
> > 	I disagree with this article. I lost enough mail addresses in the past
> > when tried to use them "as is" without paying attention on how well they
> > munged in the archives or public web-pages; when I started to use my new
> > address only in limited number of "trusted" public places (and always
> > check how well it is munged in these "trusted" public places) the problem
> > was "magically" solved.
>
> There's no such thing as losing an email address to spammers, unless you're
> doing something truly stupid like using easy passwords so they can hijack
> your account.

	Spammers don't need passwords. They need the user attention! If I have 
address that receives dozens or more spam messages per day I consider 
it "destroyed". I don't have a time to filter spam messages by hand and 
didn't found really effective way to filter them automatically without 
possibility to lose legitimate messages yet.

> There's plenty of tools to deal with the spam problem the 
> right way, there's really no legitimate excuse to deal with it the lazy,
> ineffectual way.

	Just let's remember recent spam assault in wine-users. How many users was 
able to filter out this spam messages automatically? Almost nobody I guess. 
This suggests that most users at this list don't know about perfect (or 
near-perfect) solution how to automatically distinguish between spam and 
legitimate messages and I think that it doesn't exist yet.
	BTW, my current way of dealing with spam is very efficient in practice. For 
my e-mail I receive few spam messages per week. For e-mail addresses that was 
published in some *popular* places without munging I receive up to 
hundreds of spam messages per day (so I just disabled these addresses because 
of this).

	Anyway, this becomes offtopic discussion (not related to WINE or its 
forum/ML). So let's discuss this farther offlist; I sent you a messages with 
more detailed answers/questions privately. Thank you.

	*	*	*

	Originally my answer to this topic was about that users of the forum have an 
option to hide their e-mail (make it non-public) and maybe they don't want it 
to be available for everyone (BTW, all addresses will be munged by public 
e-mail archives automatically).
	One reason for this is that they probably don't expect to receive answers via 
e-mail and this is what most likely to happen because many of us use 
reply-to-all button in MLs. This is true even if (forum) user decided to not 
hide his/her e-mail in the forum settings. This is mostly privacy-related 
question. So if we decide to post their address there should be big fat 
warning in the setting of the forum about this. But I consider posting their 
address in "From:" field as very bad idea because of above reason. And I 
don't see reasons where disclosement of e-mail address of forum users would 
be actually useful for other people who are using ML.