Please create a system for mailing list owners to
access the logs that prove that subscriptions were
confirmed (opt-in confirmation). Ideally, this would
be available both via the web administration page and
via email, like all other list management tasks.
Logged In: YES
user_id=836732
This was just posted to nanog:
From: Vivek Khera <khera@KCILINK.COM>
Organization: Khera Communications, Inc., Rockville, MD
Subject: Re: Media: Fearing 'Spam' Label, Advertisers Wary
of E-Mail
To: SPAM-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
Precedence: list
X-UIDL: 96919
>>>>> "JD" == JC Dill <spam-l@VO.CNCHOST.COM> writes:
JD> At 12:27 PM 8/29/2003, Laura Atkins wrote:
>> > This is what a list manager server *should* do, if it
isn't doing it
>> > already then we need to just ask the developers to add
this feature in.
>>
>> A lot of hassle for an extremely limited (if any) benefit.
JD> I believe that being able to prove that a subscription
was confirmed
JD> is going to become increasingly important as legitimate
mailing lists
JD> are increasingly being asked to prove their legitimacy.
Proof means
JD> keeping and being able to produce the relevant logs,
doesn't it?
We have found that by keeping a copy of the confirmation
request and
upon confirmation the full headers of the incoming message,
we cover
pretty much any request we've gotten. Nobody has ever asked
for more
(not to say that they won't in the future). Since we
started allowing
confirm by click, instead of the return message headers, we
keep the
details of time, IP address, browser version, and full HTTP
request.
That seems to have been sufficient, too.
We keep this information in the per-subscriber record in our
database,
so that we can pull it up any time, for as long as the
record is in
our database (up to 6 months after they unsubscribe). After
that
time, we'd have to dig thru some CDs to find it, but it is there
forever.
This is all for our proprietary broadcast-only announcement
system, so
it was easy to modify to do this...
What I'd really like is for Mailman to support this type of
record
keeping, so the discussion lists we operate for some
non-profits can
also have this kind of protection.
Logged In: YES
user_id=836732
oops, it was spam-l, not nanog. Sorry!