Anonymous emails

[+benh57]

I'm willing to bet that if you refrained from making comments in forums and logs, that these emails would stop.

Sorry, I don't get that. I should stop using the facilities of GC.com so that Groundspeak members don't send me abusive emails? Well, yes, it would work since I would then no longer be a member. But it's hardly where I'm trying to get to, is it?

 

 

Oh come on. You know exactly what he meant, and chose to ignore his point. And you creatively edited out the part of his message which clarified it, leaving only an out of contect snippet which does not make his point properly.

 

Again, If you get so much"abusive" mail, which no-one else seems to, then there is probably a reason for it. Look into yourself first.

 

Your choice not to tell us what this 'abusive' mail is regarding is also telling.

[+benh57]

Unfortunately (from my personal perspective) it is not true that Groundspeak respects the privacy of the senders (what they claim comes close to a lie) as it sends along data to the recipient which are in many cases more sensitive than the e-mail address of the sender. This happens regardless of whether or not the sender of the mail chooses to send along his e-mail adress.

 

Nice catch. They do indeed pass your IP address in a custom x-originating-ip: header, even if you do not choose to send your email address. That is definitely not a good thing.

[+tozainamboku]

Unfortunately (from my personal perspective) it is not true that Groundspeak respects the privacy of the senders (what they claim comes close to a lie) as it sends along data to the recipient which are in many cases more sensitive than the e-mail address of the sender. This happens regardless of whether or not the sender of the mail chooses to send along his e-mail adress.

 

Nice catch. They do indeed pass your IP address in a custom x-originating-ip: header, even if you do not choose to send your email address. That is definitely not a good thing.

And I bet they are capturing this information precisely so that they can respond to an abusive email sent via Groundspeak. If I wanted to send abusive email, I'd create a sock puppet account with a temporary email address. But if I sent it from a computer that I use for my normal account, Groundspeak might be able to trace it back to me using the IP address. Knowing this information is captured and forwarded to the recipient should satisfy the OPs original request and still prevent an email address being given to a potential spammer.

[cezanne]

If I wanted to send abusive email, I'd create a sock puppet account with a temporary email address. But if I sent it from a computer that I use for my normal account, Groundspeak might be able to trace it back to me using the IP address.

 

I do not mind if Groundspeak is able to trace back e-mails sent via the Groundspeak server (as I am not intending to send around abusive mails), but I do mind that every recipient of a mail sent via Groundspeak can do that (without having to interact with Groundspeak). I have no problems with sending along the e-mail address that am using for geocaching purposes, but I do have problems with the fact that Groundspeak transmits the IP-number (NB: in many cases the IP-number allows to identify the real name and other personal data). Moreover, I feel that it is quite unfair to claim that privacy is respected by Groundspeak while this is not true at all.

 

Cezanne

Edited October 12, 2007 by cezanne