Could I suggest that e-mail addresses are hidden...?

March 13, 2005 3:39 AM

[My Little Pony] There seems to be a little concern now that registrations are open again, that for the bargain price of five dollars a spammer could get access to a large number of e-mail addresses. Could I suggest that e-mail addresses are hidden and a posting form put in it's place so we can remain easily contactable?
posted by dodgygeezer to Feature Requests at 3:39 AM (33 comments total)

Use a disposable e(g-, hot-, yahoo-, whatever-)mail address. Problem solved.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:25 AM on March 13, 2005

We appreciate that you are looking out for us, dodgygeezer, but I don't really lie awake at night worrying about SPAM. Disposable address plus the delete key does it for me.
posted by fixedgear at 4:31 AM on March 13, 2005

Disposable address.

On further reading of the thread/problem you refer to, you'll discover that at least one, if not all, of those contacted were reached at addresses listed on their personal websites.
posted by geekyguy at 4:50 AM on March 13, 2005

If you don't want to set up a new hotmail/yahoo/whatever account, especially if you suspect you won't actively check it, then I recommend Spam Gourmet.

It allows you to create any number of new 'disposable' email addresse. The neat part is that those addresses forward directly to your 'real' account, so you don't have to check multiple email accounts.
posted by urban greeting at 6:02 AM on March 13, 2005

Could I suggest that e-mail addresses are hidden and a posting form put in it's place so we can remain easily contactable?
posted by dodgygeezer to feature requests at 3:39 AM PST [!]

That's a lot of overhead for the server.

But I always thought a 'messages' tab would be pretty neat. Internal messages, which doesn't seem too much work for $5 registration.
posted by Mean Mr. Bucket at 6:12 AM on March 13, 2005

I should say that I'm not really too bothered about this for me - my mailbox is already at saturation point as regards spam so I just live with it. Popfile is my friend. Also I wasn't really referring to that other thread - it just reminded me of something I was thinking about earlier.

The reason I'm suggesting it is because it's the easiest possible solution. Throw away accounts are no good because, umm, you throw them away and never check them ever again. Spam gourmet is a reasonable idea however I think it'd be nice to have a solution built into the site.

I'd be surprised if it took much more than an hour or two to implement this at Matt's end (I wouldn't have suggested it otherwise).

Of course there could be other advantages too. For example the user name of the sender could be automatically apended to the e-mail.

So to sum it all up - this idea should be easy to implement, it's easier for users to use than other solutions and could offer other minor benefits. But you know, if people don't like the idea that's cool too - it's not like I'm trying to sell you anything here.

On preview: I remember the idea of an internal messaging system came up before and it's certainly a good idea it just takes longer to build. Maybe that could be a long term goal and this could be a short term solution?
posted by dodgygeezer at 6:57 AM on March 13, 2005

this idea should be easy to implement

you might read this excellent advice on how to persuade people to change software. it doesn't mention getting the meta-hordes off your back at the same time, though.
posted by andrew cooke at 7:34 AM on March 13, 2005

andrew: That is good advice. As you know, I was the guy who had to get Viewropa working and I did find a lot of the feature requests wearysome, and it doesn't help when people ask for things in the worst way possible - sometimes people don't appreciate that every feature request is hours of my personal, unpaid time going up in smoke - and then nobody uses the damn thing! Grr! Having said that I was also indebted to users of Viewropa who often offered suggestions and fiendishly simple ideas for how certain things could be done that only made my life easier and often saved me a lot of time. I'd hope this might fall into the latter category.

Anyhoo, I did make a point of using the words should be in that sentence rather than is for the reasons you point out. If it's complicated though then I'm happy to be corrected.
posted by dodgygeezer at 8:34 AM on March 13, 2005

Use a disposable e(g-, hot-, yahoo-, whatever-)mail address. Problem solved.

Not really, though. This is a low-risk solution for any one application, but eventually you run into the same problem: you've got an email account where you actually want to get mail, and it's full of spam. Whether that's your one, primary custom domain name address or a hundred different free accounts, it's the same problem. And actually I find keping 100 seperate free accounts to be more of a pain, because you have to juggle cookies and log in/out of all of them, and you can't centralize your spam filtering rules. So, point taken, but I don't agree that's an open-shut no-brainer for all purposes. Not if you actually want to get emails that MeFites send you.

I imagine the form submit would be a pain in the ass to build, and could, of itself, be spammed. But in principle it's not a terrible idea. I have never taken the time to really customize my user page, but I've seen people who have complex blogs and such on theirs. Is it possible to add your own contact form somehow? If there's a primer on how to trick out one's member page, I'd love to read it.
posted by scarabic at 8:59 AM on March 13, 2005

wasn't trying to lecture, really - just looking for an excuse to link to that, in the hope that it will become famous world wide. :o)
posted by andrew cooke at 9:18 AM on March 13, 2005

I've actually had several email addresses posted -- not even munged, but as mailto clickable links -- on my web pages for about a year now, and I haven't gotten any spam from them. I'm much more likely to get spam from a known correspondent (read friends and family) including me in a forwarded joke or inspirational email, which gets forwarded by other recipients, which eventually ends up in a spammer's hands.
posted by orthogonality at 10:17 AM on March 13, 2005

scarabic writes "And actually I find keping [sic] 100 separate free accounts to be more of a pain, because you have to juggle cookies and log in/out of all of them, and you can't centralize your spam filtering rules."

Get your own domain. Set up one or more email addresses at it, and then send all other email for that domain to a "catchall" account. Filter the catchall account with rules that extract "good" email, like all email to "[e-mail]", rather than trying to catch spam (on the assumption there's more spam than valid email).

When and if spammers start sending to [e-mail], change your metafilter address to [e-mail], and change your filter to extract [e-mail] addressed email while ignoring [e-mail] email.

Cost of a domain: about $7.00/year.

Cost of minimal hosting, with email: about $12.00/year.

Total cost to have as many email addresses as you want with POP access and little spam or hassles: under $20/year.
posted by orthogonality at 10:25 AM on March 13, 2005

Email addresses got re-arranged after a similar askme. I haven't gotten one piece of spam (before or after). I don't think there's a need for something beyond what's currently in place.

(Personally, I'd rather lofi got fixed.)
posted by Jim Jones at 10:38 AM on March 13, 2005

Oops, I meant after a similiar metatalk thread.

/must not drink and post, must not drink and post.
posted by Jim Jones at 10:40 AM on March 13, 2005

Yeah, orthogonality, that is a better setup. Only weakness is maintenance, and that anybody's address book entries for me will expire. But that's okay because they can always come back to my member page to email me.

But anyway it's academic for me; I haven't gotten any spam I know of.
posted by scarabic at 3:07 PM on March 13, 2005

scarabic writes "Only weakness is maintenance, and that anybody's address book entries for me will expire."


Do what I do: when you retire an important address because of spam, have a autoreply sent to anyone who emails that address.

I use a variant of this one:

My email address has changed.
My new email address is my first name AT mydomain.tld
My first name is scarabic
If you're a human, you'll be able to figure out my email address from this. If you're a spambot, you won't.
Again, the new address is [e-mail]
where "xxxxxxxx" is replaced with my first name.

So far, I've had few or no spams to the new address, but any real correspondent can figure out what that new address is.
posted by orthogonality at 3:39 PM on March 13, 2005

With the rather intense anti-spam sentiment at MeFi, I get the feeling that if someone were as stupid as to try to harvest MeFi addresses and spam them, not only would they be tracked down, but someone would file suit or have them prosecuted.

When used for good, pack mentality can be quite an amusing weapon.
posted by Saydur at 5:02 PM on March 13, 2005

Why not make it 20 ?
posted by sgt.serenity at 5:09 PM on March 13, 2005

The reason I'm suggesting it is because it's the easiest possible solution.

No, the easiest solution is to use a disposable email account.

scarabic, I use Mailshell to protect my half-dozen or so 'real' mail accounts. I need to remember nothing to use it, other than a single login/password combo. It was free when I signed up, years ago. I receive zero spam. Other, similar solutions are available.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:07 PM on March 13, 2005

One could always use my method.
posted by neckro23 at 6:29 PM on March 13, 2005

It doesn't get output on neckro23's profile page at all though, as he's switched off Show email on profile page in his preferences.
posted by fvw at 7:09 PM on March 13, 2005

Internal messages

would be fantastic. They'd feel less intrusive than e-mailing someone, and I doubt the IMing would get out of hand.
posted by NickDouglas at 10:27 PM on March 13, 2005

That is good advice. As you know, I was the guy who had to get Viewropa working and I did find a lot of the feature requests wearysome, and it doesn't help when people ask for things in the worst way possible - sometimes people don't appreciate that every feature request is hours of my personal, unpaid time going up in smoke - and then nobody uses the damn thing! Grr!

Righto!
posted by nthdegx at 12:28 AM on March 14, 2005

I notice, having looked around their site without logging in, that Mailshell no longer seems to offer webmail-based filtering accounts for Joe InternetUser, paid or otherwise, as far as I can tell. Sorry 'bout that.

I'm just happy they still support those of us who signed up way back when.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:10 AM on March 14, 2005

nthdegx: Don't worry dude, you're cool as is virtually everyone else. I did have one particular person in mind when I wrote that but I didn't want to go into specifics.
posted by dodgygeezer at 1:29 AM on March 14, 2005

orthogonality just gave me an idea..

Why not just have one standard public address that always delivers a similar autoresponse ("my real address is..") to direct humans to an address you actually read?

It's simple, nothing expires or needs maintenance, and inconvenience is limited to each person trying to contact you for the first time having to re-send the message to a different address.

(Of course, it doesn't fix the "company x needs an email address for registration on their stupid website" problem, but that's what hotmail's for.)

I suppose, if we want a pony, that metafilter could do this itself, and fire back a customised autoresponse to anyone that mails {your_username}@plebs.metafilter.com.
posted by cell at 6:59 AM on March 14, 2005

I was the guy who had to get Viewropa working and I did find a lot of the feature requests wearysome, and it doesn't help when people ask for things in the worst way possible - sometimes people don't appreciate that every feature request is hours of my personal, unpaid time going up in smoke - and then nobody uses the damn thing! Grr! Having said that I was also indebted to users of Viewropa who often offered suggestions and fiendishly simple ideas for how certain things could be done that only made my life easier and often saved me a lot of time. I'd hope this might fall into the latter category.

Hey dodgygeezer, great looking site (Viewropa). I remember you (or someone else) showing off the mock-ups of that way back and I thought "yeah right, we'll see if they follow through on the idea". You did, and have done a really good job!
posted by FieldingGoodney at 7:38 AM on March 14, 2005

cell,

spam software can harvest emails via an autoresponder.

There are solutions kind of like what you're talking about, but they take the form of software like spam assassin, etc.
posted by chaz at 9:07 AM on March 14, 2005

Ah, I'm a pillock, I grabbed the source with wget and piped it through grep, forgetting that wget doesn't get the logged-in page. You might want to toggle "show email on profile page" neckro!
posted by fvw at 9:55 AM on March 14, 2005

With the rather intense anti-spam sentiment at MeFi, I get the feeling that if someone were as stupid as to try to harvest MeFi addresses and spam them, not only would they be tracked down, but someone would file suit or have them prosecuted.

Your making the assumptions that some spammers aren't 1) dumb as a sack of hammers 2)low lifes with the ethics of leech 3) wasting away the days on some beach in Tombago far from the reach of most of their victims. Or all three. The first spammers were like this and it hasn't gotten any better.

orthogonality's method is good and in a similiar vein to what I have on my profile page. I think any harvest bot that can figure out my email could be making a lot more money in all the places a good AI would be useful.
posted by Mitheral at 10:02 AM on March 14, 2005

Hey dodgygeezer, great looking site (Viewropa). I remember you (or someone else) showing off the mock-ups of that way back and I thought "yeah right, we'll see if they follow through on the idea". You did, and have done a really good job!

Thanks FG, but I should point out it wasn't just me. I did the code and taz did the graphics, layout and pretty stuff (take a bow taz). And there's a whole bunch of credits on the site, it's truly a collaborative project. But thanks again.
posted by dodgygeezer at 10:20 AM on March 14, 2005

Okay, so my email's still in the source. I forgot about that detail (fixed now), but my main point was the image.
posted by neckro23 at 5:00 PM on March 14, 2005

How about you just do what I did? Not exactly tough, really.
posted by shepd at 2:23 PM on March 15, 2005