Re: Water tight opt-in (yet another FUSSP)

On Sun 05/Jan/2014 00:38:37 +0100 Martijn Grooten wrote:
>> I don't think I got that.  D'you mean "direct access" as an
>> alternative to letting some social network notify for them?
> 
> No. This might be me not understanding the proposal correctly, but
> it sounded that as a recipient, you would give some senders a
> (tagged) address that would make the email go straight to your
> inbox.

Maybe because I mentioned delivering into a given IMAP folder?  That
is a directive for the mailbox provider, not the sender.  It uses the
identifiability of mail streams (e.g. by domain/list-id).  Then, yes,
the sender may get a more direct path to that folder, compared to the
possibly longer and winding path of unknown mail, but still through
regular SMTP.

> Given my skepticism about the need for such a solution in the first
> place, I'd be hesitant to ask you to write down the details. But if
> you're really keen, I guess that would help the discussion.

I tried and better http://fixforwarding.org/wiki/Water_tight_opt-in

I have no idea how clear I managed to make it, also because my English
is what it is.  I welcome your skepticism, and would be grateful if
you could use it to find the lame passages of that page.

Ale
-
This is the asrg mailing list.  To change your subscription settings, see
http://lists.services.net/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr/domain=lists.gurus.org