From: Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)
Date: Tue Sep 05 2000 - 17:00:35 CDT
Charles Lindsey <chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes:
> Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> writes:
>> This works fine for headers with technical intent; it doesn't work
>> nearly as well for articles with social intent. If we want to get
>> people to use the value of Complaints-To, it pretty much has to be on
>> the majority of articles; otherwise, it's just another weird header
>> that people might be adding themselves.
> It (or its Injector-Info equivalent) should be in the headers of
> articles posted via ISPs that have abuse departments). But I would not
> expect it in articles posted from company sites or most universities.
Possibly not (I'm of two minds on whether to add it to my own servers, for
example). But that still accounts for the majority of Usenet traffic.
> Would it help for complaints-to to be (by convention) the first
> parameter of Injector-Info?
Maybe, but I don't think it would help that much. Someone who has no real
understanding of Usenet is unlikely to understand what "Injector-Info"
means and will just see a big blob of data like a Received header.
-- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>