next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects
On Nov 30, 6:00pm, "Colin J. Williams" wrote:
} Daryle Niedermayer wrote:
} > On Mon, 30 Nov 1998, Peter Morgan wrote:
} >
} > > I think both some sort of "instant activation" and "access everywhere"
} > > capability is really important.
} >
} > It may be a matter of semantics but I would caution against the "instant
} > activation" option. I for one am very tired of being spammed by a hotmail
} > account, write the abuse@hotmail address to complain, have the account
} > shut down and then get the same spam from another account a couple of days
} > later.
I would agree. There is no control with instant activation. It
doesn't matter what you say on your registration page. It is too easy
for somebody to lie. Many people create "throw-away" accounts on
sites that offer instant activation for the express purpose of
wreaking havoc. They're too easy to create. With these you have no
control and no idea who is using your system. The second reason is
that by forcing people to mail something in, it's a good time to hit
them up for a donation.
} This is a real problem. Could this be addressed by having the Community
} Hotmail require sender identification, as is done by community nets?
All the programs mentioned in my previous message are simply web
frontends to SMTP and POP servers. They authenticate anybody trying
to use them against a POP server, so the person has to have previously
obtained an account with you in order to use them.
}-- End of excerpt from "Colin J. Williams"
next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects