Object Expected

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said the following on 8/13/2007 5:13 PM:
> John G Harris wrote:
>> [...] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>> provide a sender address that
>>> complies with RFC2822 [2], subsection 3.4.1.
>> But only if you want lots of spam.
>
> It is true and should be mentioned that a compliant sender address tends to
> attract spammers. However, that does not mean necessarily that spam is
> received by the corresponding mailbox.

You have a fundamental flaw of not being able to grasp reality sometimes.

> It is also true and should be mentioned that not providing a compliant
> sender address disregards Netiquette (as it forces off-topic discussions
> like this),

What "forces off-topic discussions like this" is your inability to grasp
the reality of spam and wanting to dictate some archaic policy from 1996
and then you start whining because people won't do it the way you want
them to.

> violates Internet standards

Pure unadulterated bullshit.

> and, last but not least, constitutes a violation of the Terms of Use
> of many NetNews providers and therefore can lead to account cancellation.

You always throw out that "many NetNews providers" straw-man argument.
The last 2 Usenet Providers that I have used (Comcast and Giganews)
explicitly advise to use a fake email address. And, can you name the
last account that was canceled because someone that was paying them
money for the service used a fake email address?

>>> Your Message-ID header is also borken, the domain part has to be a FQDN
>>> (see RFC1036 [3], 2.1.5).
>> <snip>
>>
>> Ignore that; it's out of date.
>
> Utter nonsense.

What is "Utter nonsense" is your inability to accept Reality and you
desire to stay stuck in 1996 or so.

--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq/index.html
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/

In comp.lang.javascript message <46C0C982.3030209.TakeThisOut@PointedEars.de>, Mon,
13 Aug 2007 23:13:38, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars.TakeThisOut@web.de>
posted:
>John G Harris wrote:
>> [...] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>> provide a sender address that
>>> complies with RFC2822 [2], subsection 3.4.1.
>>
>> But only if you want lots of spam.
>
>It is true and should be mentioned that a compliant sender address tends to
>attract spammers. However, that does not mean necessarily that spam is
>received by the corresponding mailbox.

And that does not necessarily mean that it is harmless. It will be
handled as far as is necessary to determine that it can be handled no
more; and you evidently do not fully comprehend what that may entail.

>It is also true and should be mentioned that not providing a compliant
>sender address disregards Netiquette (as it forces off-topic discussions
>like this),

No; it's merely your control-freak nature that causes it. You should
find a useful occupation, such as house-painting, suited to your
personality.

Personally, I blame the USAAF.

--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ???@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Check boilerplate spelling -- error is a public sign of incompetence.
Never fully trust an article from a poster who gives no full real name.