Using your email address posted as a link on Usenet

[Terry]

Can this be done?

I do very little web editing, but I have a link on my web page that
will invoke your email editor and automatically fill in the subject.

Can I make a signature in a message that will link someone to that link
that will automatically open an editor for an email message?

 

[CS]

Can this be done?

I do very little web editing, but I have a link on my web page that
will invoke your email editor and automatically fill in the subject.

Can I make a signature in a message that will link someone to that link
that will automatically open an editor for an email message?

I'm sure there's a way you can do it, however, consider what may
happen if you do..... SPAM!

 

[Plato]

I do very little web editing, but I have a link on my web page that
will invoke your email editor and automatically fill in the subject.

Can I make a signature in a message that will link someone to that link
that will automatically open an editor for an email message?

What type of editor?

 

[SingaporeWebDesign]

Hello,

I don't have a answer to your question, but I would like to caution you that
publishing your e-mail on a publicly available website will get picked up by
spam bots who will add it to many mailing lists.

Having said that, you can try looking at this page for the parameters
(signatures) you can use.
http://www.webdevelopersnotes.com/tips/html/1.php3

 

[Terry]

What type of editor?

I use Thunderbird, but the link I am talking about will open an email
using whatever mail reader the users that clicks the link has.

I haven't figured out how to link a link.

 

[Terry]

What I am shooting for is a way not to publish my email adddress on
Usenet. Having a link to web page would make it harder to harvest my
email address.

A link to a link is what I am trying to figure out how to do.

 

[SingaporeWebDesign]

Hello,

When you use the mailto link, and users click it, it will open their default
email program.

<a href="mailto:">Click Me</a>

 

[Terry]

Hello,

When you use the mailto link, and users click it, it will open their default
email program.

<a href="mailto:">Click Me</a>

Do you have a mailto link on your web page? What I was trying to do
was link to that link.

It would be nice to have a signature to a Usenet message that worked
like the mailto command.

I can make a link to the page that has the mailto command, but this
takes some hunting for the other party.

 

[Malke]

Do you have a mailto link on your web page? What I was trying to do
was link to that link.

It would be nice to have a signature to a Usenet message that worked
like the mailto command.

I can make a link to the page that has the mailto command, but this
takes some hunting for the other party.

Why not just put your munged email address in your signature instead of
messing about with this if all you want to do is have your address in
Usenet posts. Many people only read Usenet in plain text anyway. You could
simply have one of the recommended three lines of your signature say "email
me at myaddress-at-domain-dot-com".

Malke

 

[Terry]

Why not just put your munged email address in your signature instead of
messing about with this if all you want to do is have your address in
Usenet posts. Many people only read Usenet in plain text anyway. You could
simply have one of the recommended three lines of your signature say "email
me at myaddress-at-domain-dot-com".

I was shooting for a one click method of disclosing your email address.
I would think a link to a link would make it difficult for email
harvesters and still make it easy for anyone to email you.

The at dot com method is a good way to protect your email address. It
is not particularly convenient for someone to be able to use it.

 

[Malke]

I was shooting for a one click method of disclosing your email address.
I would think a link to a link would make it difficult for email
harvesters and still make it easy for anyone to email you.

The at dot com method is a good way to protect your email address. It
is not particularly convenient for someone to be able to use it.

Whatever. Personally, I wouldn't recommend 1) reading Usenet in anything but
plain text; 2) clicking on any links in a Usenet message from a Windows
machine; 3) most people who would do email from Usenet (and I'm obviously
not one of them) would simply use the "Reply To" address. But whatever
floats your boat. I hope you solve the issue to your satisfaction.

Malke

 

[Terry]

Whatever. Personally, I wouldn't recommend 1) reading Usenet in anything but
plain text; 2) clicking on any links in a Usenet message from a Windows
machine; 3) most people who would do email from Usenet (and I'm obviously
not one of them) would simply use the "Reply To" address. But whatever
floats your boat. I hope you solve the issue to your satisfaction.

Malke

Posting a link to your email address would only be one step deeper than
posting a link to your web page. I can't help but note that yours is
included with your signature.

So your recommendation would be to not click on the link to your web
page?

Have you tried adding a mailto command to your site?

I was trying to get away from using the reply too address. This is the
address spammers harvest. Which was the need for another method.

 

[Paul Johnson]

Can this be done?

I do very little web editing, but I have a link on my web page that
will invoke your email editor and automatically fill in the subject.

Can I make a signature in a message that will link someone to that link
that will automatically open an editor for an email message?

Not quite the same way. Generally speaking, even the worst examples of GUI
email and news readers will automatically create a hyperlink out of any
properly formed URL or URI. RFC1738 can tell you more.

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1738.html

 

[Paul Johnson]

http://wiki.ursine.ca/Best_Online_Quoting_Practices
Please avoid quoting in reverse order as it reduces readability.

What I am shooting for is a way not to publish my email adddress on
Usenet. Having a link to web page would make it harder to harvest my
email address.

This is not the problem you're trying to solve.

The real problem is that your email provider is not giving you enough
control over what gets rejected at SMTP time. All good spam antispam
measures must do a few things to be considered effective in the real
world:

1) Minimize the number of false-positives generated. Any anti-spam
measure is not supposed to treat legitimate email as spam.

2) Minimize the number of false-negatives generated. Any anti-spam
measure is not supposed to treat spam as legitimate email.

3) Never place stumbling blocks in the way of users. No anti-spam
measure should ever require additional effort on the part of the
sender.

Munging email addresses in email and news posts fails on all three
points soundly.

1) Munging considers all email spam regardless of content or source.

2) Munging assumes anybody able to replace an email address is not a
spammer.

3) Munging is a potentially insurmountable stumbling block for end
users, especially if there is no way to unmunge the address in
question.

So, the correct solution to the problem you're trying to solve? Shop for
email service provider that gives you control over what content and
sources you're willing to accept from at SMTP time. Undesirable
content gets rejected at the mail server, you get everything else.

 

[Paul Johnson]

When you use the mailto link, and users click it, it will open their
default email program.

<a href="mailto:">Click Me</a>

That assumes an environment suitable for HTML, which email and newsgroups is
not.

 

[Paul Johnson]

I'm sure there's a way you can do it, however, consider what may
happen if you do..... SPAM!

Using your real email address is not the problem.

The real problem is that your email provider is not giving you enough
control over what gets rejected at SMTP time. All good spam antispam
measures must do a few things to be considered effective in the real
world:

1) Minimize the number of false-positives generated. Any anti-spam
measure is not supposed to treat legitimate email as spam.

2) Minimize the number of false-negatives generated. Any anti-spam
measure is not supposed to treat spam as legitimate email.

3) Never place stumbling blocks in the way of users. No anti-spam
measure should ever require additional effort on the part of the
sender.

Munging email addresses in email and news posts fails on all three
points soundly.

1) Munging considers all email spam regardless of content or source.

2) Munging assumes anybody able to replace an email address is not a
spammer.

3) Munging is a potentially insurmountable stumbling block for end
users, especially if there is no way to unmunge the address in
question.

So, the correct solution to the problem you're trying to solve? Shop for
email service provider that gives you control over what content and
sources you're willing to accept from at SMTP time. Undesirable
content gets rejected at the mail server, you get everything else.