KMail 1.9 bounce feature? - KDE

This is a discussion on KMail 1.9 bounce feature? - KDE ; Hello, I recently switched from KMail (whatever is in 3.3.2) to KMail 1.9.1 (3.5.1) and instantly missed the bounce feature. (In fact, it's a very nice way to tell some jerks - those address is verified - to stop sending ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: KMail 1.9 bounce feature?

  1. KMail 1.9 bounce feature?

    Hello,

    I recently switched from KMail (whatever is in 3.3.2) to KMail 1.9.1
    (3.5.1) and instantly missed the bounce feature. (In fact, it's a very nice
    way to tell some jerks - those address is verified - to stop sending mail).
    Is there a patch / port available for 1.9.1? I really do miss this feature.

    Keep smiling
    yanosz
    --
    Enable extra annoying warnings (EXTRA_WARNINGS) [N/y/?] (NEW)
    uclibc daily 2 feb 2005

  2. Re: KMail 1.9 bounce feature?

    Jan Luehr wrote:
    > Hello,
    >
    > I recently switched from KMail (whatever is in 3.3.2) to KMail 1.9.1
    > (3.5.1) and instantly missed the bounce feature. (In fact, it's a very nice
    > way to tell some jerks - those address is verified - to stop sending mail).
    > Is there a patch / port available for 1.9.1? I really do miss this feature.


    Think you have to port it from an older version, I guess the reason it's
    removed is that many of thous bounces will go to people who don't have to do
    with the spam and of course the extra bounces generated when the e-mail is a
    fake one.


    //Aho

  3. Re: KMail 1.9 bounce feature?

    Hello,

    J.O. Aho wrote:

    > Jan Luehr wrote:
    >> Hello,
    >>
    >> I recently switched from KMail (whatever is in 3.3.2) to KMail 1.9.1
    >> (3.5.1) and instantly missed the bounce feature. (In fact, it's a very
    >> nice way to tell some jerks - those address is verified - to stop sending
    >> mail). Is there a patch / port available for 1.9.1? I really do miss this
    >> feature.

    >
    > Think you have to port it from an older version, I guess the reason it's
    > removed is that many of thous bounces will go to people who don't have to
    > do with the spam and of course the extra bounces generated when the e-mail
    > is a fake one.


    Well, it depends. In general for a lot of people, it's really hard to say,
    whether this bounces are true or faked.( Of cause, nowadays bounces appear
    almost instantly within the smtp-process, but I know and use uucp <-> smtp
    gateways that cannot do simple smtp bounces by design)
    I do see why the programmers do have reasons for removing this or that
    feature and I don't sense in discussing it, I just ask, whether there _is_
    some port / patch.

    Keep smiling
    yanosz


    --
    Enable extra annoying warnings (EXTRA_WARNINGS) [N/y/?] (NEW)
    uclibc daily 2 feb 2005

  4. Re: KMail 1.9 bounce feature?

    Jan Luehr wrote:

    > Hello,
    >
    > I recently switched from KMail (whatever is in 3.3.2) to KMail 1.9.1
    > (3.5.1) and instantly missed the bounce feature. (In fact, it's a very
    > nice way to tell some jerks - those address is verified - to stop sending
    > mail). Is there a patch / port available for 1.9.1? I really do miss this
    > feature.
    >
    > Keep smiling
    > yanosz


    Why bother with this feature it never did what it was suppose to. Most all
    of these spammers have fake addresses anyways. Glad they did away with it.

    RV

    --
    "You can lead them to LINUX
    but you can't make them THINK"

  5. Re: KMail 1.9 bounce feature?

    Hello,

    Evo wrote:

    > Jan Luehr wrote:
    >
    >> Hello,
    >>
    >> I recently switched from KMail (whatever is in 3.3.2) to KMail 1.9.1
    >> (3.5.1) and instantly missed the bounce feature. (In fact, it's a very
    >> nice way to tell some jerks - those address is verified - to stop sending
    >> mail). Is there a patch / port available for 1.9.1? I really do miss this
    >> feature.
    >>
    >> Keep smiling
    >> yanosz

    >
    > Why bother with this feature it never did what it was suppose to. Most all
    > of these spammers have fake addresses anyways. Glad they did away with it.


    What on earth makes you think I'm going to bounce some spammer?

    Keep smiling
    yanosz
    --
    Enable extra annoying warnings (EXTRA_WARNINGS) [N/y/?] (NEW)
    uclibc daily 2 feb 2005

  6. Re: KMail 1.9 bounce feature?

    Jan Luehr wrote:

    > Hello,
    >
    > Evo wrote:
    >
    >> Jan Luehr wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hello,
    >>>
    >>> I recently switched from KMail (whatever is in 3.3.2) to KMail 1.9.1
    >>> (3.5.1) and instantly missed the bounce feature. (In fact, it's a very
    >>> nice way to tell some jerks - those address is verified - to stop
    >>> sending mail). Is there a patch / port available for 1.9.1? I really do
    >>> miss this feature.
    >>>
    >>> Keep smiling
    >>> yanosz

    >>
    >> Why bother with this feature it never did what it was suppose to. Most
    >> all of these spammers have fake addresses anyways. Glad they did away
    >> with it.

    >
    > What on earth makes you think I'm going to bounce some spammer?
    >
    >


    because that's really the ONLY use of a "bounce" function.....

    --
    Gordon Burgess-Parker
    Interim Systems and Management Accounting
    www.gbpcomputing.co.uk

  7. Re: KMail 1.9 bounce feature?

    Hello,

    Gordon wrote:

    > Jan Luehr wrote:
    >
    >> Hello,
    >>
    >> Evo wrote:
    >>
    >>> Jan Luehr wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Hello,
    >>>>
    >>>> I recently switched from KMail (whatever is in 3.3.2) to KMail 1.9.1
    >>>> (3.5.1) and instantly missed the bounce feature. (In fact, it's a very
    >>>> nice way to tell some jerks - those address is verified - to stop
    >>>> sending mail). Is there a patch / port available for 1.9.1? I really do
    >>>> miss this feature.


    >>> Why bother with this feature it never did what it was suppose to. Most
    >>> all of these spammers have fake addresses anyways. Glad they did away
    >>> with it.

    >>
    >> What on earth makes you think I'm going to bounce some spammer?

    >
    > because that's really the ONLY use of a "bounce" function.....


    Well, as I said before, I'm planning for already verified addresses.
    Chainletters, annoying posts, etc.

    Keep smiling
    yanosz

    --
    Enable extra annoying warnings (EXTRA_WARNINGS) [N/y/?] (NEW)
    uclibc daily 2 feb 2005

  8. Re: KMail 1.9 bounce feature?

    Jan Luehr wrote:

    > Hello,
    >
    > Gordon wrote:
    >
    >> Jan Luehr wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hello,
    >>>
    >>> Evo wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Jan Luehr wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Hello,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I recently switched from KMail (whatever is in 3.3.2) to KMail 1.9.1
    >>>>> (3.5.1) and instantly missed the bounce feature. (In fact, it's a very
    >>>>> nice way to tell some jerks - those address is verified - to stop
    >>>>> sending mail). Is there a patch / port available for 1.9.1? I really
    >>>>> do miss this feature.

    >
    >>>> Why bother with this feature it never did what it was suppose to. Most
    >>>> all of these spammers have fake addresses anyways. Glad they did away
    >>>> with it.
    >>>
    >>> What on earth makes you think I'm going to bounce some spammer?

    >>
    >> because that's really the ONLY use of a "bounce" function.....

    >
    > Well, as I said before, I'm planning for already verified addresses.
    > Chainletters, annoying posts, etc.
    >


    In other words Spam. Why not just set up a filter to delete from server
    emails from anyone not in your address book......

    --
    Gordon Burgess-Parker
    Interim Systems and Management Accounting
    www.gbpcomputing.co.uk

  9. Re: KMail 1.9 bounce feature?

    __/ [ Jan Luehr ] on Sunday 02 April 2006 14:00 \__

    > Hello,
    >
    > J.O. Aho wrote:
    >
    >> Jan Luehr wrote:
    >>> Hello,
    >>>
    >>> I recently switched from KMail (whatever is in 3.3.2) to KMail 1.9.1
    >>> (3.5.1) and instantly missed the bounce feature. (In fact, it's a very
    >>> nice way to tell some jerks - those address is verified - to stop sending
    >>> mail). Is there a patch / port available for 1.9.1? I really do miss this
    >>> feature.

    >>
    >> Think you have to port it from an older version, I guess the reason it's
    >> removed is that many of thous bounces will go to people who don't have to
    >> do with the spam and of course the extra bounces generated when the e-mail
    >> is a fake one.

    >
    > Well, it depends. In general for a lot of people, it's really hard to say,
    > whether this bounces are true or faked.( Of cause, nowadays bounces appear
    > almost instantly within the smtp-process, but I know and use uucp <-> smtp
    > gateways that cannot do simple smtp bounces by design)
    > I do see why the programmers do have reasons for removing this or that
    > feature and I don't sense in discussing it, I just ask, whether there _is_
    > some port / patch.
    >
    > Keep smiling
    > yanosz


    Many Web hosts (including mine) continue to offer challenge/response E-mail
    filters, which are server-side utilities similar to their desktop-side
    counterpart: bounce. I have become aware of the fact that it nosifies
    cyberspace, so in my Apache settings, I put SpamAssassin before BoxTrapper
    as to avoid many 'bounces' earlier on, when spam has been identified (SA is
    quite reliable).

    KMail no longer has this feature due to its impact on E-mail traffic, which
    is on par in its severity to the case described above. It's a somewhat
    selfish filter if you assume that spammers will abuse it (and they will!).
    This KMail 'issue' was raised and discussed a couple of months ago in this
    newsgroups.

    Best wishes,

    Roy

    --
    Roy S. Schestowitz | "Software sucks. Open Source sucks less."
    http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    7:50pm up 25 days 9:33, 10 users, load average: 0.50, 0.82, 0.84
    http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project

+ Reply to Thread