well, photo.net is up, but you still can't sign up or log on. Photo.net users - is this normal? Seems worse than being on yahoo!
One idea for hosting - I might talk to Brian Reid who hosts the Leica Users Group and a couple of others. He runs the servers himself and I have never ever known them to go down ( and the LUG has a huge volume of messages most of the time). tim
You'd be amazed how small the demand is for pictures of trees... - Fred Astaire to Audrey Hepburn
www.photo-muse.blogspot.com blog
Well, Brian Reid has offered the LF forum space on his servers. I have no idea if what he has fits our tech requirements, so I have just passed the information on the the List Owner and the techie knowledgable folks who have chimed in
tim
You'd be amazed how small the demand is for pictures of trees... - Fred Astaire to Audrey Hepburn
www.photo-muse.blogspot.com blog
photo.net is run by basically the same people who run LUSENET. Philip Greenspun is the majority shareholder of photo.net. The Terms of Use are legal boilerplate, and are in the process of being reviewed and changed because the lawyers put stuff in there that a lot of people don't like, and which we don't really need to run the site. They are going to be changed. Typical lawyer-grabbing-every- right-they-can-get-away-with.
No one's email address has ever been sold to anyone, and it would be amazing if that happened. We hate spam too.
Brian - thanks for that info re' the photo.net privacy policy - makes me feel a lot happier for one!
Cheers,
Thre was a notice that Photonet was going to be down on June 5th. It was in the unarchived forum I believe.
the only places I have used this email is here and at photo.net, and I have gotten spam, not much, but some.
Mark, I've been a very active member of photo.net for a year, and apart from messages from other photo.net members, I don't believe I have received spam through photo.net in my personal mail account. I only have one mail account and it receives very little spam.
One tactic of spammers is to use address-harvesting robots that crawl through web-sites looking for email addresses. On photo.net, email addresses are hidden from non-members, which essentially defeats robots since they don't know now to login. Addresses like feedback@photo.net that are out in the open get tons of spam ("Hi, feedback, how are you?"). So members accounts at photo.net are not harvested, unless someone goes to the trouble of teaching his robot how to login to photo.net. I can't recall this happening to me, although other members have reported receiving spam that they were convinced was due to photo.net.
Indeed, greenspun.com is easier to harvest for email addresses, since they are out in the open. The only thing that saves users here from spam is that harvesters might have a harder time finding greenspun.com because there are fewer links to it out there.
I must agree with Brian. There are valid reasons to be wary of a move to photo.net, however in terms of spam, their login system would be an improvement.
In the year and a half I've been on photo.net I think I've gotten two photo-related spam emails (both in the past two months). Since I use the same email address for here and photo.net, those emails could have been generated from this board for all I know.
I'm hoping that since LF will be it's own forum that most people will just stay out of it -- like most do with the medium format stuff.
Anyway, let's see how it goes.
By coincidence a just received a message to the effect that the widow of a former African dictator wants to transfer $45.5 million to my account. It was sent to mottershead@photo.net. This is a mail address that I actually have never used except here on greenspun.com during the past few days. It is an alias that I set up on photo.net to forward to my real account.
In all the time of using my real account on photo.net I haven't received this kind of thing. So I think the comment about greenspun.com putting mail addresses in the open being a problem is not just theoretical.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks