nanog mailing list archives
Re: EFF whitepaper
From: Richard Welty <rwelty () averillpark net>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:35:31 -0500 (EST)
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 10:07:20 -0500 Peering <Peering () xspedius com> wrote:
From personal experience, whether you check that you want furthermailings from MoveOn.org or not, they send them to you anytime you send anything (petitions, letters, etc) from their website. They're also not that great about taking you off when you complain (I have had to complain 2-3 times per incident). For this reason, no matter how I feel about the subject, I won't go through them anymore.
Hopefully one of their contacts is listening, because their mail policy is really obnoxious.
deja vu all over again. i had this conversation (about unconfirmed mailings) with a staffer at the dean campaign earlier this year. the general feeling i got was that they don't clearly understand the problem, and are much more concerned about creating a barrier to entry than worrying about creating a barrier to mail abuse. sigh, richard -- Richard Welty rwelty () averillpark net Averill Park Networking 518-573-7592 Java, PHP, PostgreSQL, Unix, Linux, IP Network Engineering, Security
Current thread:
- Re: EFF whitepaper, (continued)
- Re: EFF whitepaper Tom (UnitedLayer) (Nov 15)
- Re: EFF whitepaper Steven Champeon (Nov 15)
- Re: EFF whitepaper Tom (UnitedLayer) (Nov 15)
- Re: EFF whitepaper Patrick W Gilmore (Nov 15)
- Re: EFF whitepaper Steven Champeon (Nov 15)
- Staying on topic (was Re: EFF whitepaper) Steve Gibbard (Nov 15)
- Re: EFF whitepaper Rich Kulawiec (Nov 16)
- Re: EFF whitepaper Paul G (Nov 16)
- Re: EFF whitepaper Suresh Ramasubramanian (Nov 16)
- Re: EFF whitepaper Richard Welty (Nov 15)
- Re: EFF whitepaper J.D. Falk (Nov 17)