[P1] Suremail Permission Based System responses

[Joy Freeman]

Ah! So the actual subscribed address IS support at sur.co.uk? I just 
assumed that was a reply-to address and that the service was 
obscuring their client's address for privacy and spam-prevention 
reasons.

Well, if this person is an IT professional himself (presumably), 
there's no excuse for the rudeness. If I were a list admin, I'd alert 
him that if he didn't whitelist or otherwise arrange to accept all 
list posts, he would have the option to receive digests or be 
altogether unsubscribed. But that's just me . . . in the 
morning . . . after only one cup of coffee. Grrr....


On Monday, May 17, 2004, at 08:51  AM, malcolm cornelius wrote (in 
reply to my thick-headed post):
>> What really bugs me is that the service doesn't indicate exactly
>> *which* address they're buffering. Or maybe I'm missing an essential
>> clue hidden in the headers? If somebody needs to give the subscriber
>> a heads-up and/or unsubscribe them, how do you do that without their
>> address?!
>
> Doesn't it say something like "you are not set up as a valid sender 
> to support at sur.co.uk"  ?
>
> I just deleted the one from my earlier post.
>
> Just set a rule and delete them automatically ?
>
> Though I'd support the list nanny deleting them from the list anyway 
> and saving us all the effort !
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Joy Freeman
~ from manuscript to bound book ~
Editorial, Design, and Production Services