PE> Would everyone please make sure that when they are sending
PE> netmail messages they use a proper (ie fidonet-listed)
PE> address, instead of just sending messages to random destinations
PE> to people who don't want to receive them. Anyone who doesn't have
PE> the technology to accomplish this, please contact me and we'll see
PE> if we can find some appropriate technology to solve the problem.

Wouldnt it be a heap easier to have a fail safe at your end for
the netmail which doesnt have a proper destination address ?

While its obviously best if the sender gets it right, there is no
substitute for a safety net under that, particularly when you have
a wild variety of different systems being used to create the netmail.

PE> This applies quadruply to messages to Areafix, where failure
PE> to specify either 3:711/934, or something innocuous like your
PE> own address, could cause your password to be compromised.

Dunno, I have always explicitly NOT included a destination address
in that situation because I thought thats what was supposed to be
done. In other words if there was no destination address at all,
it was supposed to default to YOUR address. Which is just what
a message to AREAFIX is supposed to have. Why is it randomly
netmailling that to anything it feels like ?  Thats quite mad.

PE> People who have a password protected session with me get
PE> their mail processed automatically, unlike everyone else,
PE> so it is important not to compromise your password.

Yes, by defaulting the destination to YOUR node number.

--- PQWK202