anybody else been spammed by "no-ip.com" yet?

Fri May 3 22:03:30 UTC 2002

On Fri, 3 May 2002, Paul Vixie wrote:

> > I hate to sound like the big idiot here, but what exactly in the email
> > you received indicates no-ip.com spammed? It looks to me like you just
> > have some secret "admirer" who thought you wanted a no-ip.com account,
> > and no-ip.com emailed you to confirm that you do want the account.
> 
> spam is like pollution in that (a) whenever you're not sure if you're
> doing it, you probably are, and (b) if everybody did whatever it is,
> life would be universally worse for, well, everybody.
> 
> > Random disclaimer: Yes, we're a competitor of no-ip.com's... And yes, we
> > used to send similar emails to people signing up for an account,
> > although nowadays instead of sending them an initial password we send a
> > confirm URL instead.
> 
> that's the right approach.  no-ip's problem was they presumed my permission.
>

You don't even have to be in the "big idiot" league to figure out that in 
both the "wrong" and the "right" approach as sanctioned above by a higher 
authority, an email message (aka spam) is sent to the presumed subscriber.

One sends a password, one asks for permission to issue a password on their
site. What's the difference in the annoy factor, if indeed one were to be 
subscribed by a secret "admirer"?

Mr. Halmu chose to think, rather than bindly obey...

--Mitch
NetSide