RE: unsubscribed

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nigel Frankcom [mailto:nigel@blue-canoe.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 8:54 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: unsubscribed
>
>
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 00:16:06 +0200, mouss <mouss@netoyen.net> wrote:
>
> >Rob Sterenborg wrote:
> >> Steve Ingraham wrote:
> >>
> >>> I cannot help but comment on this post.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Neither can I.
> >>
> >>
> >>> I am one of those ignorant people that is subscribed to this list
> >>> (along with several others) for the purpose of asking
> questions of
> >>> you experts out there because I do not fully understand how it is
> >>> working. By all accounts everyone of you out there would
> label me
> >>> as a novice. The truth of the matter is I am a novice. As the
> >>> saying goes; "I know enough about this stuff to be dangerous".
> >>>
> >>
> >> Sorry, but this is the SpamAssassin list and the subject
> has nothing
> >> to do with "how it's working". If the OP had a question about "how
> >> it's working", he'd get an answer - I'm quite sure of that and I
> >> think you know that.
> >>
> >> This specific thread has become a rant because the OP did not show
> >> that he searched for himself first on how to do something simple:
> >> unsubscribe from this list. If he put the least effort in finding
> >> information on how to do that (how hard can it be to just
> go to the
> >> SA website and click "Lists" to find the info?), he wouldn't have
> >> sent the email that started all this.
> >>
> >
> >A lot of people don't see the difference between foo@example.com and
> >foo-owner@example.com (replace "owner" by "unsubscribe", "admin',
> >'request", ... depending on the list). They think these are the same
> >addresses. you can't blame them, really.
> >
> ><nasty idea>
> >for someone to post, he must subscribe, then unsubscribe, then
> >resubscribe. only then can he post a message. Unfortunately,
> even this
> >won't work (besides annoying us with an N steps procedure) as people
> >will anyway forget... </nasty>
> >
> >I have already seen message saying "Please help me unsubscribe from
> >your group...blah blah", and this was a reply to to group message,
> >which signature contains the procedure to unsubscribe! (so
> if the guy
> >just read the message before hitting the send button...). In
> short, he
> >quoted a message that responds to his question.
> >
> >but if people were to search for information effectively,
> they wouldn't
> >buy from spammers, and that alone would reduce spam!
> >
> >>
> >>> What I would like to say by posting this is; why don't all you
> >>> experts out there relax a bit? I, for one, acknowledge your
> >>> superiority over
> >>>
> >> me
> >>
> >>> in this spam stuff.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I don't think this has anything to do with anyones "superiority in
> >> this spam stuff" (certainly not mine as I'm not). This has
> something
> >> to do with willing to take the effort and finding things out for
> >> yourself instead of just doing something and bother others with it
> >> (well, in this case it would be "bother" I suppose).
> >>
>
> Having started this in the 1st place by questioning why users
> didn't check the headers, I'd like to apologise to anyone
> who's taken offence. My comment was just that, a comment.
>
> Several of the responses have been of the 'we use it for
> quick help' variety; which is fine and something I personally
> have no problem with.
>
> For it to get blown up to this proportion seems a little over
> the top all things considered.
>
> So, for any that took offence from my post, again, I apologise.
>
> I still think checking mail headers is a basic part of manual
> mail checking but hey, I guess others feel differently.
>
> Live and let live.
>
> Regards
>
> Nigel

>

I too wish to express my apologies.

My post was not meant to be directed toward any one individual poster. I was only voicing some frustrations that have occurred when I do post. Too often I get responses to a question that do not help me to understand what is happening because they are condescending, short or too vague for me to understand. My intent for my post was to ask those of you who do understand these systems to be aware that many of us posting on this list may not fully understand them and are asking for your expert assistance.

I read posts daily and very seldom post myself. I think this should have been another instance when I did not post as well. My post was motivated by frustrations that I should not have expressed here.

Live Long and Prosper
Steve Received on Thu Oct 18 09:37:53 2007