Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: This list is being harvested for leads
I personally didn't mind a one-time notice from the dev's team that that are now offering paid commercial support. What if I WANTED it? I felt like it was a courtesy email from them to let me know that it's available.
If those emails continue unsolicited, then it may start to feel like spam to me, but this did not.
In general, I've actually been looking for ways to financially support good open source projects. I have worked with many & find that oftentimes, the ones with hood commercial support tend to be ones that have the manpower resources needed to quickly fix bugs, patch vulnerabilities, maintain a strong development schedule & give decent support through mailing lists & similar means.
So when I received the email, immediately I thought: "Hmm. This may come in handy down the road, and would serve two purposes by giving me an easily justifiable means to support the project".
That is all.
- Doug Mortensen impalanetworks.com Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Giles Coochey Sent: 5/17/2012 9:33 AM To: dovecot@dovecot.org Subject: Re: [Dovecot] BEWARE: This list is being harvested for leads
On 17/05/2012 16:20, Dennis Guhl wrote:
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 10:56:50AM -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2012-05-17 10:20 AM, dovecot-20120517@billmail.scconsult.com wrote:
On 17 May 2012, at 9:46, Charles Marcus wrote:
Tim is working closely with Timo, and I'm sure got Timo's permission to send that email to list subscribers. I subscribed to the Dovecot Users mailing list, not "Whatever spam Timo thinks is justifiable." I'm about ready to add you to my PLONK file Bill.
That is ridiculous... if a formal announcement about a commercial support company that has Timo's blessing isn't pertinent to participants on the dovecot support list, then what is? I did not received this mail so I can't comment on the appearance but I would not be happy to receive any unrequested commercial offers, irrelevant which form it comes along.
I can understand Timo's desire to acquire as much paying customers as possible, but in this case he should at least have announced -- publicly -- what he plans to do and how to opt out.
Such 'ideas' are a sure way to kill all the good reputation, which is crucial for open source projects. And, not to forget, it can lead to some nasty legal problems. Such forms of email marketing are at least in the EU and US prohibited.
Just admit you made a silly mistake and move on... The only silly mistake was this answer of yours.
Dennis [sarcasm on] No, I think we should lock Tim & Timo up and force Timo to eat lentils while he codes his IMAP server for us. It's incredibly astounding that he should even need to be involved in a business where he makes money developing my free IMAP server software!!! [sarcasm off]
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 09:47:23AM -0600, Douglas Mortensen wrote:
I personally didn't mind a one-time notice from the dev's team that that are now offering paid commercial support. What if I WANTED it?
There might be a lot of people who did not mind one offlist contact to a list address, but on the other side there will also be the fraction saying no, I subscribed to a mailing list and not to a marketing list.
I felt like it was a courtesy email from them to let me know that it's available.
The company was announced onlist sometimes around this time last year after Timo unofficially announced the company during a talk at the mailserver conference in Berlin.
If those emails continue unsolicited, then it may start to feel like spam to me, but this did not.
Obviously you are more tolerant in this regard then I would be.
In general, I've actually been looking for ways to financially support good open source projects. I have worked with many & find
No question, but the way and form should be considered.
Dennis
[..]
Even with "good intent" the message in question is clearly in violation of CAN-SPAM and Cal. Bus. Prof. Code Sec. 17529, of which the sender was informed of when my server was accessed. It was very clearly an "electronic mail message the primary purpose of which is the commercial advertisement or promotion of a commercial product or service." The sender did not have my direct consent to deliver such messages, nor did they have a preexisting business relationship with me.
There was no notification that subscribing to this list would result in off-list commercial messages. There is no way to opt out of these messages. The message in question did not conform to the requirements of CAN-SPAM in regard to, at least: the CAN-SPAM requirements
- Identifying the message as an advertisement
- Including the valid physical postal address of the sender, recognized by the US Postal Service
- Providing an opt-out mechanism (at all in this case), compliant with
Yes, in this particular instance I found the content to be not distasteful; however is is very clearly "spam" as legally defined in the US and in California.
Jeff Kletsky wrote:
Even with "good intent" the message in question is clearly in violation of CAN-SPAM and Cal. Bus. Prof. Code Sec. 17529, of which the sender was informed of when my server was accessed.
And you have proof of this? That they received notice? I assume you have their signature? Computers talking in the night doesn't count as 'proof'.
It was very clearly an "electronic mail message the primary purpose of which is the commercial advertisement or promotion of a commercial product or service."
Really? Dovecot is a commercial venture? I thought it was freesoftware. Someone, with the personal permission of the list owner was allowed to mention that they would be willing to offer support for this product?
Are you pissed because they didn't offer it for free? This is a list about dovecot -- no where does it say it will be private nor that the email addresses on this list are protected from spam. Dovecot isn't a private company.
It doesn't matter if it was good or bad intent. You being on this listof your own free will establishes a relationship of the sort that, if pre-existing, permits commercial offers. If you don't want that ever again, otherwise by remaining on the list, you give some permission for occasional messages that might be construed to offering services for money, that are approved by the list owner.
If it exceeds anyone's tolerance, including mine, I would believe any of us would have the same right to leave. I don't think the list
owner would want to abuse his position and cause wholesale departures.
OTOH, I don't think this
rises anywhere near to the level of even the most minor offense.
Personally, I found this discussion *about* the issue to have generated more traffic than all the spam I've gotten from this list in the past 6 months.
So -- guess what? I don't care.
You might want to reconsider your demands on the list owner who has put together some fine quality software for your use -- for free.
Otherwise, you risk really looking like a completely self-centered
pompous ass.
And note, this is based on current traffic levels from this list of
such email (which are way exceeded by the people talking about it -- so
it's completely irrational to argue about it occurring or not when the
people complaining about it have generated over 10 times as much traffic
in a few days. As for the spam
levels from here.. My spam filters regularly take out about 30 spam
messages/day
(based on the 1200+ messages in the past 40 days in my spam folder).
Like 1
email from a list I subscribe to is gonna likely even be noticed by
me?? Unlikely.
(normally a lurker, but someone who can't tolerate intolerance! ;-) )...
Linda Walsh wrote the following on 18.05.2012 10:32:
Jeff Kletsky wrote:
Even with "good intent" the message in question is clearly in violation of CAN-SPAM and Cal. Bus. Prof. Code Sec. 17529, of which the sender was informed of when my server was accessed.
And you have proof of this? That they received notice? I assume you have their signature? Computers talking in the night doesn't count as 'proof'.
It was very clearly an "electronic mail message the primary purpose of which is the commercial advertisement or promotion of a commercial product or service."
Really? Dovecot is a commercial venture? I thought it was free software. Someone, with the personal permission of the list owner was allowed to mention that they would be willing to offer support for this product? Are you pissed because they didn't offer it for free? This is a list about dovecot -- no where does it say it will be private nor that the email addresses on this list are protected from spam.
Dovecot isn't a private company. It doesn't matter if it was good or bad intent. You being on this list of your own free will establishes a relationship of the sort that, if pre-existing, permits commercial offers. If you don't want that ever again, otherwise by remaining on the list, you give some permission for occasional messages that might be construed to offering services for money, that are approved by the list owner.If it exceeds anyone's tolerance, including mine, I would believe any of us would have the same right to leave. I don't think the list owner would want to abuse his position and cause wholesale departures. OTOH, I don't think this rises anywhere near to the level of even the most minor offense.
Personally, I found this discussion *about* the issue to have generated more traffic than all the spam I've gotten from this list in the past 6 months.
So -- guess what? I don't care.
You might want to reconsider your demands on the list owner who has put together some fine quality software for your use -- for free.
Otherwise, you risk really looking like a completely self-centered pompous ass. And note, this is based on current traffic levels from this list of such email (which are way exceeded by the people talking about it -- so it's completely irrational to argue about it occurring or not when the people complaining about it have generated over 10 times as much traffic in a few days. As for the spam levels from here.. My spam filters regularly take out about 30 spam messages/day (based on the 1200+ messages in the past 40 days in my spam folder).
Like 1 email from a list I subscribe to is gonna likely even be noticed by me?? Unlikely.(normally a lurker, but someone who can't tolerate intolerance! ;-)
)...
Well said Linda!
All that noise because of one mail offering some paid support is so unnecessary!
The Delete-Button is just one click away and in case something like this happens too often what for do we have this wonderful Sieve to this great Dovecot-software? ;-)
On Fri, 2012-05-18 at 11:35 +0700, Tamsy wrote:
All that noise because of one mail offering some paid support is so
one mail multiplies by all the miscreants in the world adds up to a bucket load of crap
unnecessary!
Actually, it has merits, because it is spam, had it gone to users@ or announce@ it of course would be no big deal, the fact it went direct is where the line was crossed when there is no explicit mention in the lists welcoming message that you might from time to time get commercial opportunity emails sent directly to you.
The Delete-Button is just one click away and in case something like this happens too often what for do we have this wonderful Sieve to this great Dovecot-software? ;-)
As is the auto redirect address to place the senders MTA server IP in DNSBL's.
Imagine the outcry you mob would be carrying on about if Microsoft did the same thing, nobody would be so quick to defend them :)
OH, and it would not be the first time dovecots servers have been in a DNSBL, last time was about 2 or 3 years ago IIRC.
On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 20:32 -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
Jeff Kletsky wrote:
Even with "good intent" the message in question is clearly in violation of CAN-SPAM and Cal. Bus. Prof. Code Sec. 17529, of which the sender was informed of when my server was accessed.
And you have proof of this? That they received notice? I assumeyou have their signature? Computers talking in the night doesn't count as 'proof'.
Doesn't matter, those acts are only effective against people from your own country or those who use services based in that country, they do not and can not apply to anyone else (despite what the U.S. Govt likes to think)
On Fri, 18 May 2012 16:01:42 +1000 Noel Butler articulated:
Doesn't matter, those acts are only effective against people from your own country or those who use services based in that country, they do not and can not apply to anyone else (despite what the U.S. Govt likes to think)
Absolutely incredible -- I have counted 35 posts in response to what is basically a non-event. It must have been a really slow news day.
-- Jerry ♔
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
Dibble's First Law of Sociology: Some do, some don't.
On 2012-05-18 6:48 AM, Jerry jerry@seibercom.net wrote:
Absolutely incredible -- I have counted 35 posts in response to what is basically a non-event. It must have been a really slow news day.
Yeah - I'm inclined to classify *all* of the complaints about said non-event as *spam*, since none of them were in line with the purposes of the list...
;)
--
Best regards,
Charles
On Fri, 2012-05-18 at 06:48 -0400, Jerry wrote:
basically a non-event. It must have been a really slow news day.
non-event? You wouldnt be saying that if certain other operators with their products did that. I've seen you bitch and whinge about far far far less over the years Jerry.
On May 19, 2012 9:36 AM, "Noel Butler" noel.butler@ausics.net wrote:
On Fri, 2012-05-18 at 06:48 -0400, Jerry wrote:
basically a non-event. It must have been a really slow news day.
non-event? You wouldnt be saying that if certain other operators with their products did that. I've seen you bitch and whinge about far far far less over the years Jerry.
Almost every commercial product I know off does send unsolicited email. There's a delete or report spam button/shortcut key for that. If it helps some other users, and more importantly the dovecot project, i'm not too bothered with that little inconvenience. The world doesn't revolve around my convenience....
Oon-Ee Ng wrote the following on 19.05.2012 08:43:
On May 19, 2012 9:36 AM, "Noel Butler"noel.butler@ausics.net wrote:
On Fri, 2012-05-18 at 06:48 -0400, Jerry wrote:
basically a non-event. It must have been a really slow news day.
non-event? You wouldnt be saying that if certain other operators with their products did that. I've seen you bitch and whinge about far far far less over the years Jerry.
Almost every commercial product I know off does send unsolicited email. There's a delete or report spam button/shortcut key for that. If it helps some other users, and more importantly the dovecot project, i'm not too bothered with that little inconvenience. The world doesn't revolve around my convenience....
This thread has already evolved into an ideological conflict. Better to leave it now since every word, every further argument is just heating the atmosphere up and is scaring other users off the list…
On 2012-05-18 10:18 PM, Tamsy dovecot-list@mohtex.net wrote:
This thread has already evolved into an ideological conflict. Better to leave it now since every word, every further argument is just heating the atmosphere up and is scaring other users off the list…
Best just to PLONK Noel, as I did a long time ago...
But I totally agree, please, everyone, just let this thread die. It was a ONE TIME thing, and Timo already admitted he didn't think it through.
Anyone who can't see the difference between this (non) event and what real spammers do is just brain-dead.
--
Best regards,
Charles
On Sat, 2012-05-19 at 09:43 +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
Almost every commercial product I know off does send unsolicited email.
Indeed, its why DNSBL's were developed
There's a delete or report spam button/shortcut key for that. If it helps some other users, and more importantly the dovecot project, i'm not too bothered with that little inconvenience. The world doesn't revolve around my convenience....
But every bit of spam would help someone depending on who that person is, maybe a tiny minute percentage, and thats why they keep doing it, but it does not justify the action to the masses.
After all, spammers see it as promoting/marketing, they never call what they are doing, spamming.
On Sat, 19 May 2012 11:36:24 +1000 Noel Butler articulated:
non-event? You wouldnt be saying that if certain other operators with their products did that. I've seen you bitch and whinge about far far far less over the years Jerry.
Hell I bitch about a lot of things; however, that does not change the facts of the case. Only a subset of this list received the message in question -- and I was not one of them. Secondly, The FreeBSD forum is constantly under siege from spammers because the operators of that forum are to stupid/lazy/naive(place your adjective here) to require at a minimum that posters be registered to the list. I wish I had the problems there that you are complaining about here.
Now, correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Timo aware of this message being sent? And, isn't this list controlled by Timo? Ipso facto, doesn't that give him the right to do pretty much what he wants with the list?
In any case, this whole thread is starting to remind me of my wife, bitching over nothing that happened months ago.
-- Jerry ♔
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
On Sat, 2012-05-19 at 08:25 -0400, Jerry wrote:
Hell I bitch about a lot of things; however, that does not change the facts of the case. Only a subset of this list received the message in question -
Likely to see how many people bitched before the rest
- and I was not one of them. Secondly, The FreeBSD forum is constantly under siege from spammers because the operators of that forum are to stupid/lazy/naive(place your adjective here) to require at
Well, that's to "a list", where you subbed to received anything from "the list", personally I wouldn't be on any list that had no opt-in confirmation.
Now, correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Timo aware of this message being sent? And, isn't this list controlled by Timo? Ipso facto, doesn't that give him the right to do pretty much what he wants with the list?
Again, to "the list", certainly NOT by targeting list members individually "off-list" and direct, especially when there is no prior granted authority to do so.
There haven't been any new points raised in this thread since the first day. There's no point in replying to to this thread anymore.
participants (10)
-
Charles Marcus
-
Dennis Guhl
-
Douglas Mortensen
-
Jeff Kletsky
-
Jerry
-
Linda Walsh
-
Noel Butler
-
Oon-Ee Ng
-
Tamsy
-
Timo Sirainen