From: Brad Templeton (brad@templetons.com)
Date: Wed Sep 06 2000 - 17:57:53 CDT
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 06:47:26PM -0500, Jonathan Grobe wrote:
> Clearly if a primary issue is people other than experienced
> users using Complaints-To, then it would be much better as a separate
> header than buried in Injector-Info. And perhaps it could be more
> precisely named (something like Net-Abuse-Address), as few news
> administrators want general complaints.
>
> Jonathan Grobe Jonathan Grobe Books. Used & out-of-print books:
> Search or browse subject catalogs: <http://showcase.netins.net/web/grobe>
> For millions of used/out-of-print books try <http://www.abebooks.com>
> <http://www.bibliofind.com> <http://www.bookavenue.com>
>
> On 4 Sep 2000, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> > Brad Templeton <brad@templetons.com> writes:
> >
> > > This is all a lot more stuff than is needed. Define some defaults, and
> > > have people use headers only if they want to change them.
> >
> > 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.
Is that true for postmaster? for "abuse"?
You can add the header saying where complaints go if you want ,but having
a default means you don't have to add it but it still exists.
The standard can say, if you run an injector, you MUST support the
complaints address or add an alternate address, but it should not
have every site putting it in every article. That as I point out, is
like putting "Admin-to: postmaster@thissite" in every mail message rather
than having the RFC that defines the addresses like postmaster.